Skip to comments.
Bush backs right to bear arms
newsmax
| 5/7/02
Posted on 05/07/2002 5:44:52 PM PDT by JDoutrider
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 next last
Thank you Mr. President!
To: JDoutrider
Now if we can get him to fire minneta, and let the pilots regain their second amendment rights!
To: JDoutrider
"IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EVIDENCE TENDING TO SHOW THAT POSSESSION OR USE OF A "SHOTGUN HAVING A BARREL OF LESS THAN EIGHTEEN INCHES IN LENGTH" AT THIS TIME HAS SOME REASONABLE RELATIONSHIP TO THE PRESERVATION OR EFFICIENCY OF A WELL REGULATED MILITIA, WE CANNOT SAY THAT THE SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEES THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR SUCH AN INSTRUMENT. CERTAINLY IT IS NOT WITHIN JUDICIAL NOTICE THAT THIS WEAPON IS ANY PART OF THE ORDINARY MILITARY EQUIPMENT OR THAT ITS USE COULD CONTRIBUTE TO THE COMMON DEFENSE."
3
posted on
05/07/2002 5:55:04 PM PDT
by
lepton
To: JDoutrider
Finally, Bush scores some points.
4
posted on
05/07/2002 5:56:06 PM PDT
by
billybudd
To: JDoutrider
Now where are all of the Bush bashers? Come on - I know you're out there - tell us how this is a bad thing. Well, it is, if you're a liberal.
5
posted on
05/07/2002 5:56:08 PM PDT
by
11B3
To: JDoutrider
Don't hold your breath waiting for the repeal of a single one of the existing unConstitutional laws restricting the individuals' right to keep and bear arms.
Don't even think about all of those who are now serving jail sentences under the auspices of those same unConstitutional laws.
And let's not lose any sleep over those who've been shot down in their own homes by adrenaline-pumped black-suited ninjas in the course of enforcing those same unConstitutional laws.
Whoopee! Let's all celebrate, clap and cheer another great performance by the Potemkin Village People!
6
posted on
05/07/2002 5:56:43 PM PDT
by
Noumenon
To: lepton
They sure pressed that point on Randy Weaver didn't they?
To: JDoutrider; Joe Brower; Little Bill
FYI BUMP
To: Noumenon
idiot.
To: JDoutrider
Ring one up from the new Gipper :)
10
posted on
05/07/2002 5:59:20 PM PDT
by
RainDog
To: JDoutrider
To: JDoutrider
(Donning an asbestos suit)
I'm sorry to douse some water on your celebratory fireworks, but the President swore up and down that he would NEVER sign the Shays-Meehan CFR bill. No changes were made to the bill, but he signed it anyway.
I suggest you act as though the President is "iffy" in any bills reaching his desk, no matter his previous pronouncements.
Nonetheless, I still prefer him to Algore.
To: JDoutrider
Olson's court filing Monday urged the high court not to get involved and acknowledged the policy change in a lengthy footnote. Olson attached Ashcroft's letter to prosecutors.
Their reluctance to take this all through the Supreme Court is troublesome, however??? Do they think they don't have the votes on the court to uphold the 2nd or do they not want the it 'set in stone' by the Court?
13
posted on
05/07/2002 6:02:05 PM PDT
by
RCW2001
To: 11B3
OK, I'm giving W a pass on sending the jerk off in chief to East Timor. With any luck he'll be caught masturbating in public and you know how they like to fit the punishment to the crime over there. Off with his head....
14
posted on
05/07/2002 6:02:25 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
To: JDoutrider
"This action is proof positive that the worst fears about Attorney General Ashcroft have come true his extreme ideology on guns has now become government policy,"Yep.
And here's the interesting thing. The Federal Government in the past has been afraid to let a case get to the Supreme Court because it knows that a ruling like that would open a can of worms for the gun control crowd.
This Administration isn't afraid of that ruling.
15
posted on
05/07/2002 6:02:31 PM PDT
by
Dog Gone
To: JDoutrider
This is a little hard to believe. Bush and Powell have been bought and payed for by the Italian-Saudi mafia which knows it can`t takeover Israel and the US of A while we still got our guns. Ted Olson in on it too.I`ll bet he swiched papers on that fool,Ascroft, and he`s gonna ask the court to let in a bunch of Canadains that are secretly working with the UN to get our guns.
16
posted on
05/07/2002 6:02:55 PM PDT
by
bybybill
To: JDoutrider
"subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse." What the hell does that mean? More double talk. I could dirve a truck through that loophole. There is nothing in the second amendment about reasonable restrictions. Who determines the restrictions? Are we saying we will allow only toy guns? OPPS, wait that can be subject to criminal misuse as well. These idiots better go back to school. We're being taken for a ride again and what's worse is it's by our own side.
17
posted on
05/07/2002 6:03:33 PM PDT
by
Cacique
To: 11B3
Oddly enough they aren't anywhere to be found on the "House Plans To Send Borders Bill" thread either. Must be busy digging up something to post in order to start yet another Bush-bashing thread. After all, it's not a good day for them unless they can post at least two dozen, making some stuff up in the process.
To: jwalsh07
After East Timor he has been asked to speak to a large crowd of Branch Dividians and then a small stadium full of Cubans from South Florida :-)
19
posted on
05/07/2002 6:06:01 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: anniegetyourgun
I didn't see any of them on the ICC threads early this morning when I was reading those either.
20
posted on
05/07/2002 6:06:32 PM PDT
by
alnick
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-86 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