Comments on: More Congressional Hypocrisy on Gun Control

By: G. Stone

G. Stone — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 20:27:38 +0000

Thank you so very much Sen Thurston Howell III
aka John Warner for again proving that a percentage of Republican Senators lack both the basic understanding of our nations constitution as well as the balls too govern.
I will celebrate the day your hunt country ass is no longer my represenative in the U.S. Senate.

By: Jack

Jack — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 13:39:19 +0000

But only for a while. Eternal vigilence, my friend.

By: Brian Withnell

Brian Withnell — Sat, 09 Feb 2008 03:41:03 +0000

In one sense, having the ban go before the court could be a good thing, but the court is usually *very* careful about broad brush statements. If the court does in fact rule “what part of ’shall not be infringed’ do you not understand?” (as it should) the gauntlet would be not only down, but run. Our first freedom (the second amendment) would be safe for at least a while.

By: ACTivist

ACTivist — Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:08:03 +0000

Jack,

“If they really opposed the gun ban, they would have repealed it already.”

You answered your own question. The disturbing part is the line “such a categorical approach could endanger federal gun control measures, such as a ban on private possession of new machine guns. Clement proposed that the court recognize an individual right but send D.C.’s law back to lower courts to determine whether it is an unreasonable restriction.” Notice the “new” before machine guns? That’s from the ‘86 ban. Tells me that they want those measures in-place for FUTURE gun control measures. Remember this. We don’t have a true advocate for U.S. rights representing us at the U.N. and you know what that organization wants.

I think we are well on our way to grounding the true meaning of the 2nd Amendment and the “posers” are trying to cover their…..tracks!