Posted on 07/13/2005 2:57:51 PM PDT by El Laton Caliente
No. Ashcroft is not someone we want on the bench. Period.
Actually, the AG may not make the determination of what sporting purposes is. It could very well be some ATF flunkie.
Here is 18 U.S.C. 925(d)(3):
(3) is of a type that does not fall within the definition of a firearm as defined in section 5845(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and is generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes, excluding surplus military firearms, except in any case where the Attorney General has not authorized the importation of the firearm pursuant to this paragraph, it shall be unlawful to import any frame, receiver, or barrel of such firearm which would be prohibited if assembled
Basically, under the code it looks like the AG can ban certain firearm, but not parts for firearms. Either way, I'm still not a Gonzales fan knowing what his stand is on the 2nd Amendment.
Each Person should if they want it!
Death from a thousand paper cuts. My anger at this administration keeps increasing although I still believe Bush is better than Kerry.
Actually, it DOES make it sound like it is his decision.
Don't know if you saw this, thought you'd be interested.
I'm no Kerry fan, but maybe the Republican controlled congress would have grow a pair if Kerry were in office.
Would they still be legal, even with this horse$#!+ ruling, as a "curio and relic"?
If there is any justice in this world, these ATF goons will suffer the same fate as the Waco children. Then I will go and piss on their corpses. A curse on all of them.
You have just discovered the Party of Government.
All the rest of it is BS.
Spineless gasbags, every last one of them!
The ATF under the direction of George Bush and AG Alberto Gonzales having banned the importation and domestic manufacture of all powder operated firearms except for police use is now banning the importation and assembly using domestic components of the following non-sporting weapons.
IN a related story Sara Brady, Charles Schemer, and Hitlary Clinton decried the Republican move as "not going far enough," stating that 400 children a day were killed by these dangerous devices, and that there were still weapons in the hands of individuals who had hidden them from the police in the 2007 Executive Order for the general confiscation of all weapons that were capable of injuring police.
That's right. We also didn't do anything about campaign finance reform. Neither did we do anything about Gonzales v. Raich and the expansion of interstate commerce. But there's a lot of things, going back 70 years or so, that we didn't do anything about.
It's creeping communism and a steady repeal of the Constitution and Bill o' Rights. They're too frightened to try to ban the guns in one massive strike, so they get the guns piece by piece - remember, Bush said he would sign a renewal of the AWB. Soon we'll be reduced to the level the Brits are at.
Sometimes I wish they'd just come and take my house, take my guns, take my money and dole it back out to me as they see fit. Just get it over with ... they're going to do it anyway and they've made it clear we can't stop them.
Next person who wants to protect me from some ephemeral danger had best have their Kevlar unddies on.
Don't worry. Firearms restrictions will make you a lot less safe. Ask any middle class Cambodian - Oops, my bad, there aren't any middle class Cambodians let to ask :-(
Maybe the problem is that the Republicans don't want to lead us to the place we want to go. If we'd just get in line and follow like good boys and girls, they'd lead just fine. Right?
While he is pro R2KBA, I understand that he supports current gun regulations as well as increased gun regulations.
Why does Ashcroft even matter anymore?
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.