The right to bear arms

Washington Times ^ | 6/03/02

[ctdonath2]

the issue was that SOME in the "pro-gun" movement (of which I am one) want to use the 14th Amend. to support the 2nd.

The 14th is just one more legal tool to support the 2nd. May not be the best one, but if its use is allowed it works. Yes, there are debatable consequences of such use - just as some of our opponents are finding. Perhaps it is not wise to push the "incorporation" argument...but we may silence certain anti-RKBA arguments by pointing to the incorporation of other rights (that the 2nd has pointedly not been incorporated, while other have, indicates judicial misconduct on par with SCOTUS supporting racial discrimination laws: it's law, it's wrong, and it will be reversed).

At this point I'm not particularly hardcore about "state's rights" and related incorporation arguments; I can make a good argument for either side.

The ultimate point is that RKBA is a _natural_ right, that this nation was created in large part to protect & preserve those rights (as our prior oppressors had not), and something is terribly wrong with a state that flagrantly infringes upon one of those plainly recognized rights.