1 posted on
04/30/2002 12:11:21 AM PDT by
Mini-14
To: Mini-14
I find it illuminating that Cincinnait OHIO is reporting the largest exodus to the Kentucky side of the Ohio River. Ohio has Draconian Concealed Weapons prohibitions and a crime rate to prove it...not to mention a chronic race riot problem...Way to go Howard Metzenbaum...what a Legacy!!!
To: Mini-14
Why bring this up now? The AW ban will quietly expire in less than 2 1/2 years. I don't like this at all.
To: Mini-14
the Second Amendment, which contains the clause granting Americans the right to bear armsWho is this idiot? It's not a 'clause', it's the expressed meaning of the amendment.
To: Mini-14
Ashcroft has sure turned out to be a disappointment.
To: Mini-14
Let's see, the NRA gets Bush elected and Bush turns around and hires Anti-gun Senators to attack the NRA and its supporters in court. Every day Bush appears to be the liberal Keyes and Buchanan said he was.
To: Mini-14
The only silver lining I could see, is that this old coot will botch his arguement and end up losing. Man, I know I'm grabbing at straws.
14 posted on
05/01/2002 7:08:46 AM PDT by
stevio
To: Mini-14
Don't knock Ashcroft yet. Yes, he's defending the AWB - but (a) that's his job, and (b) who better to defend a bad law [with the ultimate goal of destroying it] than someone who opposes it? Ashcroft is acting as "Devil's Advocate": by representing the other side, he ultimately HELPS us.
The challenge eventually had to be made. Question is, would you rather have "death to gunowners" Reno defend it or "NRA life member" Ashcroft?
To: Mini-14
Ashcroft has never been anything but a self serving weasel. He will do and say absolutely anything that will secure his power. Why isn't he a Democrat?
The Atty. Gen. may be responsible for defending all laws, but nothing requires him to do it well. All the Govt. had to do was show up in court and say it was a stupid law and they didn't like it either.
So9
To: Mini-14
Hate to point this out, but this was "news" 10 days ago, and was liberally covered on FR at that time.
48 posted on
05/01/2002 11:27:12 AM PDT by
Redbob
To: Mini-14
". . . Second Amendment, which contains the clause granting Americans the right to bear arms." The Second Amendment reaffirms an inalienable right Americans have to keep and bear arms! God gives us the right to protect ourselves, not the bleeping government or a piece of sacred parchment!
61 posted on
05/01/2002 2:03:48 PM PDT by
Taxman
To: Mini-14
"And as attorney general, Ashcroft has to enforce and defend existing laws, even those that he might disagree with."The Bill of Rights trumps anything Congress comes up with, short of amending the Constitution itself. Knowing Atty. Gen. Ashcroft's background, this can only mean one thing, his action in this matter proves him to be a simple tyrant in support of the same.
Duck hunting my ass!
62 posted on
05/01/2002 2:33:29 PM PDT by
spunkets
To: Mini-14
He argued that assault rifles with combat hardware were not needed by hunters and sportsmen. Even leaving aside the issue that freedoms in America are not defined by being able to prove a "need", note that the "hunters and sportsmen" phrase diverts attention from the people who really *do* "need" combat gear: Those who prepare for self defense, and the defense of their communities/nation.
Ever wonder why they always get left out?
75 posted on
05/01/2002 4:39:27 PM PDT by
Dan Day
To: Mini-14
In the post 9/11 world just tell Ashcroft there are no longer any "Assault Weapons". They have all been converted to "Homeland Security" Rifles.
Best regards,
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson