Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: OldDeckHand
"... On balance, I agree with scholars such as co-blogger Eugene Volokh and Jack Balkin who argue that McDonald will have only a limited practical effect... [...] a wide range of other firearms regulations should be perfectly legal."

Really? I have a feeling that 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) and 922(r) couldn't survive a court case.

This is the 'Sporting Purposes' section of Title XVIII in the US Code of Justice brought in by the 1968 Gun Control Act.

After McDonald's RKBA incorporation under the 14th Amendment's Due Process clause, how can any individual civil right related to firearms be mitigated by or reconciled with it's suitability for duck hunting?

Give it a few more years and some careful strategy backed up with a goodly amount of partisan funding to bring the case forward and much of the 1968 GCA and the Hughes Amendment to 1986 FOPA is as dead as fried chicken dinner.

Knock those laws on their asses and the job of BATFE Field Agent will be about as exciting a career as Dept. of Agriculture's "Grain Silo Meter Tare Weight Calibration and Certification Technician I"

6 posted on 06/28/2010 7:19:32 PM PDT by The KG9 Kid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: The KG9 Kid

Hell, Lets just ban Chapter 4 of 18 USC....that would make liberal’s heads explode.


7 posted on 06/29/2010 5:27:11 AM PDT by DCBryan1 (FORGET the lawyers...first kill the "journalists".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson