Skip to comments.
Bush Lawyers Target Gun Control's Legal Rationale
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ^
| January 7, 2005
| JESS BRAVIN
Posted on 01/07/2005 9:56:54 AM PST by neverdem
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-265 next last
To: neverdem
Welcome news indeed.
I wonder what else lurks on the second term W agenda...
BTTT
To: neverdem
Thanks for the info and the link.
42
posted on
01/07/2005 10:45:41 AM PST
by
SilentServiceCPOWife
(A tagline! A tagline! My kingdom for a tagline!)
To: Howlin
So much for the "Bush is dumping on gunowners" rants.
All it argues is that there is an individual right.
There is nothing to undermine the Bush doctrine of "reasonable restrictions" which is exactly the Schumer/Feinstein doctrine.
Read the part of the memo relating to Miller, and consider the obvious unasked question: "if a sawed off shotgun isn't related to military use and thus may be restricted under the NFA of 1934, WHAT ABOUT MACHINE GUNS!!!!?"
Bush supports 1934, 1968, 1986, and AWB. He loves restrictions. I guess like Kerry, he believes there is an individual right to have shotguns and hunting rifles for certain people who jump through certain hoops. Big deal.
Bush has perfectly fallen into the trap set by the antis. They present an absurd position (collective right) as if it is a legitimate dispute, then Bush crows, and his gullible supporters applaud, when he says that the absurd is incorrect. Imagine how excited you will be when the Supreme Court finally rules that it is an individual right. Big deal. Decades of creeping gun control, and some gullible people will think that "we" will have gained something. In fact, we are fighting on their turf, instead of discussing repeal of unconstitutional gun laws like 1934, 1968, and 1986.
JFK used federal powers to keep states from opressing blacks. Bush hasn't lifted a finger to releive the oppression of residents of DC, for instance. And his minions have continued to toss people in jail for possessing guns that should be legal under the Constitution.
43
posted on
01/07/2005 10:46:14 AM PST
by
Atlas Sneezed
(Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
To: TERMINATTOR
You know, I wonder if there is anything that George Bush can do that you all can't find SOMETHING wrong with.
Ridiculous.
44
posted on
01/07/2005 10:46:43 AM PST
by
Howlin
(I need my Denny Crane!)
To: gieriscm
45
posted on
01/07/2005 10:47:58 AM PST
by
BCR #226
To: Puppage
the Second Amendment grants individuals nearly unrestricted access to firearmsYes I remember the Second Amendment (Republican version) well saying that the right of the people to bear arms shall only be somewhat infringed unless the government wants to infringe it for what bureaucrats think is a good reason. As opposed to the Democrat's version which says the right of the people to bare arms only applies to those people in the military and law enforcement.
46
posted on
01/07/2005 10:50:35 AM PST
by
from occupied ga
(Your government is your most dangerous enemy, and Bush is no conservative)
To: neverdem
WSJ: "the Bush administration has issued a 109-page memorandum aiming to prove that the Second Amendment grants individuals nearly unrestricted access to firearms."
It says nothing of the kind. It says there is an individual right, but it says nothing contrary to the multitude of onerous restrictions on access to firearms presently endured by the people.
47
posted on
01/07/2005 10:52:19 AM PST
by
Atlas Sneezed
(Your Friendly Freeper Patent Attorney)
To: neverdem
All I think you really need to do is get people to read the early drafts of the Bill of Rights. Phrases like the militia clause where common in many of the other items (including free speech) but were dropped in most other cases because they weren't really necessary. Basically, that clause is meant to justify the claim to that right, not to qualify it.
You can find a good collection of early versions here.
To: Question_Assumptions
Thanks for the link, bookmarked.
49
posted on
01/07/2005 10:58:37 AM PST
by
neverdem
(May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
To: cyncooper
But but, Bush is liberal! How could his administration be doing this? He's pretty liberal in using our money to build a bigger, more powerful fedgov, but he's definitely not all bad, case in point.
To: neverdem
The late July 28, 1789 version of the Second Amendment is particularly interesting because it has an additional important explanatory clause missing from the ratified version, by the way:
"A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but no person religiously scrupulous shall be compelled to bear arms."
To: neverdem
.... the Second Amendment confers a broad right of gun ownership, comparable with the First Amendment's grant of freedom of speech and religion. It is amazing how un-common, common sense is and how refershing it is to see it in Government.
The US Bill of Rights does confere broad ownership rights for "arms." The 2nd Ammendment is not about duck hunting, no matter what the liberals would like folks to think.
I think that everyone should read the Declaration of Independence and contemplate its relationship to the Second Ammendment.....
"We hold these truths to be self-evident...--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, ...it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
52
posted on
01/07/2005 11:06:29 AM PST
by
Robert357
(D.Rather "Hoist with his own petard!" www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1223916/posts)
To: neverdem
This sounds like it was written by a gun grabber.
To: Robert357
See the link to the early drafts of the Bill of Rights that I provided earlier in this thread. Early drafts of the Second Amendment (as well as the early drafts of other amendments) make what they meant a lot clearer.
To: neverdem
This is excellent and needs to be distributed as much as possible.
If anything, it should be sent to EACH INDIVIDUAL STATE'S ATTORNEY GENERAL as a question on whether they agree with this.
Lets get thise guys on the record for 2006.
To: neverdem
I want to see the barrel of an M60 sticking out of my cupola, Mr. Attorney General. If your memorandum doesn't do that, it hasn't gone far enough.
56
posted on
01/07/2005 11:16:45 AM PST
by
sergeantdave
(Help save the environment. Mail your old tires and garbage to the local Sierra Club.)
To: neverdem
as applying not to individuals but rather to the "well-regulated militia" maintained by each state. How in the HELL can the "Militia" in the Bill of rights, ratified Dec. 15, 1791, apply to a Gov't formed Militia when the Militia Act wasn't passed until May 2, 1792?!?!!!
57
posted on
01/07/2005 11:17:33 AM PST
by
OXENinFLA
(I WILL find all those *%#$ING LITTLE GREEN FROGS in Metal Gear Solid!!!)
To: Puppage
In the liberal/leftist/socialist/commie mind amendments 1,3-9 are all about individual rights. Yet for some magically faaaaaaabulous reason number 2 is a colective right.
and therein lies the trick of the left, they do believe in "rights". Rights as collective rights with the individual right subservient to the rights of the state.
To: TERMINATTOR; Howlin
59
posted on
01/07/2005 11:20:43 AM PST
by
OXENinFLA
(I WILL find all those *%#$ING LITTLE GREEN FROGS in Metal Gear Solid!!!)
To: Puppage
they will never do it to many people value that law it won't go away trust me
60
posted on
01/07/2005 11:21:26 AM PST
by
mastercylinder
(support our troops nuke Mecca)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 261-265 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson