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

Lock & Load!
1 posted on 11/06/2003 6:19:08 PM PST by PsyOp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last
To: Marine Inspector; sleavelessinseattle; 2Trievers; swarthyguy; Lazamataz; MistyCA; spetznaz; ...
Lock & load Ping.
2 posted on 11/06/2003 6:20:03 PM PST by PsyOp ( Citizenship ought to be reserved for those who carry arms. - Aristotle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
"Of the nearly quarter-million licenses, 22 (1/100th of 1%) were revoked for misuse of the firearm. Not one of those revocations were associated with any injury whatsoever. - ibid."

You absolutely need to include the crime rate for all felonious crimes per 100,000 to be compared with this "crime rate" of Foridian CCW permit holders.

Same with Texas
3 posted on 11/06/2003 6:25:34 PM PST by Maelstrom (To prevent misinterpretation or abuse of the Constitution:The Bill of Rights limits government power)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
“There is only one constitutional right in the United States which is absolute and that is your right to believe anything you want.”

Lesbian California State Senator Sheila Kuehl

5 posted on 11/06/2003 6:39:35 PM PST by ElkGroveDan (Fighting for Freedom and Having Fun)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
If it were up to me we'd ban them all. - U.S. Representative Mel Reynolds, on CNN's Crossfire, December 9, 1993.

Well, I can certainly understand why Mel Reynolds, the convicted criminal who was pardoned by Klinton, would support a gun ban.

He's liable to face an angry dad if he bangs the wrong underage staffer next time.

7 posted on 11/06/2003 6:45:55 PM PST by Dan from Michigan ("Dead or alive, I got a .45, and I never miss" - AC/DC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Commentaries which appear in this pamplet and bylines may be reproduced and republished without seeking specific permission

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You cannot license a right and still expect it to be treated like a right.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

A concealed-carry law "levels the playing field between the criminals and the victims," Bailey said Current law puts citizens at a disadvantage because criminals don't obey the laws, he said.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The right to self defense should not stop at the front door.


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Then-Homicide Inspector Gil Hill, who went on to become a city councilman, said this about the killing: "I'm always glad when assholes and bullets meet."
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I don’t know of anybody that is against the war, except terrorists.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

One of the reasons that our soldiers are put in harms way in other countries like (Iraq) is because their government has gone bad.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The evils of gun control schemes. We need to believe in the preservation of firearms ownership.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
One Comma or Three? The Final (ratified) version had only one comma according to the Library of Congress and Government Printing Office.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The warning sign on the horizon today is the downplaying of or drift away from self-defense. Self defense is the job of the individual not the government.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Any individual who works to disarm people or stop people from having tools to defend themselves is the blame or the poblem.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Look at the nations where the people had the power they weren’t persecuted by their government. All the other governments had disarmed subjects.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

When they have defense tools equal to the attackers they have the power to defend themselves.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Once people accept being disarmed, they become surprising easy to control and kill.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Only government officials my carry firearms. New models of firearms are dangerous by their very nature and should be posssessed by well known people only. All sales of firearms must be reported to the government. Does this sound familiar?

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

What happens when self defense is against the law? Defenseless citizens It can’t happen here.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

If you want to stop criminals you have to speak to criminals in a language they understand. If they they want to use violence against you then you have to use violence against them.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

What gun control doesn't do: Gun control advocates have long argued that regulation is needed to prevent loss of life. Steven Martinovich says that 24 000 gun laws don't seem to have much of an impact.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Two great experiments have taken place since 1987. In England, the government has disarmed its citizens and their violent crime rate had doubled since 1997. In the United States, 33 states have affirmed the rights of citizens by passing shall-issue concealed carry laws, and our violent crime rate has declined. To my eye, that should tell the story to anyone who wanted to see.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I support gun control. Shoot with two hands instead of one!

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"It is time to restore the rights of law-abiding citizens to protect themselves and to defend their families against murderous predators," Hatch, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, stated on the floor of the Senate. "It is time to tell the citizens of the District of Columbia that the Second Amendment of the Constitution applies to them, and not only to their fellow Americans in the rest of the country."
Hatch added, "The prohibition of firearms in the District of Columbia is as ineffective and deplorable as it is unconstitutional; it is high-time we rectify this wrong."
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The is none, nada, zip, absolutly no evidence that any gun laws have EVER had a positive influence on crime. I challenge anyone to show any credible evidence that restrictive gun laws work.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Diplomacy is that art of saying "Nice Doggie"...till you can find a rock

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


"Why is Rick Stanley wearing a gun on his hip openly carrying for all to see?"

1. An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
2. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone.
3. Colt: The original point and click interface.
4. Gun control is not about guns; it's about control.
5. If guns are outlawed, can we use swords?
6. If guns cause crime, then pencils cause misspelled words.
7. Free men do not ask permission to bear arms.
8. If you don't know your rights you don't have any.
9. Those who trade liberty for security have neither.
10. The United States Constitution © 1789. All Rights Reserved.
11. What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?
12. The Second Amendment is in place in case they ignore the others.
13. 64,999,987 firearms owners killed no one yesterday.
14. Guns only have two enemies: Rust and Politicians.
15. Know guns, know peace. No guns, no peace.
16. You don't shoot to kill; you shoot to stay alive.
17. 911- government sponsored Dial a Prayer.
18. Assault is a behavior, not a device.
19. Criminals love gun control-it makes their jobs safer.
20. If guns cause crime, then matches cause arson.
21. Only a government that is afraid of its citizens tries to control them.
22. You only have the rights you are willing to fight for.
23. End the gun control laws in place, don't make more.
24. When you remove the people's right to bear arms, you create slaves.
25. The American Revolution would never have happened if the colonists had submitted to Gun Control Laws.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Posted on 09/26/2003 9:41 AM CDT by Republican Red
Hillary Gets Tough The junior senator from New York may be surprising some people with what she has to say about Saddam and weapons of mass destruction.
PRESIDENT BUSH has a surprising defender of his contention that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction--Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York. "The intelligence from Bush 1 to Clinton to Bush 2 was consistent" in concluding Saddam had chemical and biological weapons and was trying to develop a nuclear capability, Clinton said this morning. And Saddam's expulsion of weapons inspectors and "the behavior" of his regime "pointed to a continuing effort" to produce WMD, she added.
The senator said she did her own "due diligence" by attending classified briefings on Capitol Hill and at the White House and Pentagon and also by consulting national security officials from the Clinton administration whom she trusts. "To a person, they all agreed with the consensus of the intelligence" that Saddam had WMD.
Clinton isn't normally a defender of the Bush administration. And on other issues, especially Bush's handling of postwar Iraq, she was highly critical. But she agreed, with qualifications, that preemptive military action may be necessary in certain cases, as Bush has argued was the case with Iraq.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


If you feel helpless when you dial 911. Then HELPLESSNESS IS FOR WIMPS & DEADGUYZ | 9/24/03 | Ted Nugent

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Posted Signs “No Guns allowed here” How about putting up signs that say, "Your Constitutional Rights Mean Nothing Here" or "Criminal Safe Haven -- Rob, pillage and rape at will!" Those signs would be just as accurate and more appropriate.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Why not regulate journalism? Answer, easy journalism does not kill. You say not. What if your inaccurate statements about removing all guns will remove guns from criminal hands?

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"The Era of Osama lasted about an hour, from the time the first plane hit the first tower to the moment the General Militia of Flight 93 reported for duty."

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

To Exterminate American (a proven blueprint)

By: D. Slatton September 7, 2003
• In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
• In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
• Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
• China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
• Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
• Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300.000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
• Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million "educated' people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated."
• DEFENSELESS PEOPLE ROUNDED UP AND EXTERMINATED IN THE 20TH CENTURY BECAUSE OF GUN CONTROL : 56 MILLION.
The next time someone talks in favor of gun control, ask them "Who do YOU want to round up and exterminate?" With guns, we are citizens. Without them, we are subjects...

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
We do not need more restrictive laws. "Eric and Dylan at Columbine would not have been stopped by metal detectors. No amount of gun laws can stop someone who spends months planning this type of massacre.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

NEW YORK (AP) - A federal judge on Wednesday threw out a manslaughter case against a Drug Enforcement Administration agent who fatally shot an unarmed drug suspect in the back, calling it an "ill-advised prosecution."
"This type of ill-advised prosecution, if unchecked, will surely chill federal-state law enforcement cooperation on many fronts," he said.
Editors comment. This Judge needs to go farther and make the same statement regarding law bidding citizens with firearms.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

By refusing to even address the right to keep and bear arms, the feds are sending the message that ordinary citizens cannot be trusted. "We will protect you,"

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Minnesota recently adopted a concealed carry law, and some businesses put up signs proclaiming that they were 'gun free,' " Lott said. "A couple of those stores have been robbed. So there has been a move among some store owners to reconsider advertising the fact that they are not armed." 2003, Knoxville TN news.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

When constituents ask state Rep. Scott Gunderson (WI) if letting ordinary citizens carry concealed weapons would make Wisconsin a more dangerous place, he asks them if they`ve ever been to Disney World. "I say, Do you see any trouble there? Do you see anything happening?` " Gunderson said of the amusement park in Florida, which has one of the most liberal concealed weapons laws in the country. "Well, no. And that`s the point. "There isn`t trouble in the states that have conceal-carry laws. These are law-abiding citizens. These are good people. The criminals, the bad people, are not going to go and get a permit."

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The father of a Central Intelligence Agency officer killed in the Taliban prison riot said his son is "a hero to me." Johnny Spann Sr. said his son joined the CIA after service in the Marines because "he felt he would be able to make the world a better place to live in."

"We recall Mike saying, 'Someone has got to do the things that no one else wants to do,' and that's what he was doing in Afghanistan."
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants." --Thomas Jefferson in a letter to William S. Smith in 1787. Taken from Jefferson, On Democracy p. 20, S. Padover ed., 1939
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ten thousand more gun laws will not stop violent people form committing acts against people.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

P.S. I'd like to see these posted in front of every anti-gun nutz house, just to make sure we don't infringe on their right to be victims.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

THE D.C. SNIPER SHOOTING TID BITS

In D.C. sniper shootings and one in Baton Rouge, Louisiana (which occurred while he was known to be in the area), forensics BALLISTIC experts could not positively match the bullets with Muhammad’s Bushmaster .223 Remington/5.56 NATO. That’s an example the flaws in the much-hyped Ballistic Imaging solution.

Wright Williams Jr., was one of Muhammad intended victims, as he started to lock up his grocery store, a bullet ripped through his lip and into the store’s front door. He ran toward the street, drawing a 9mm handgun as a second shot was fired. Williams returned fire as the car headed for a nearby interstate highway.

Two things are significant about this incident: It’s the only one where
the snipers split rather than face an armed citizen.

It is also the only encounter in which the snipers fired twice – once again indicating that the over-10-round magazine ban is immaterial to crime control.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I was looking for an answer for the most common question I get, which is: "You don't think the Founders intended people to have their own atomic bombs, do you?"
Such weapons now exist, are widely dispersed, and are under the control of common, mortal men. What makes us think God has sent us a special race of angels, called "officers of the government," who can be better trusted with these weapons, than you or me? Do you really believe Bill Clinton is of sterner moral fiber than you or me? Or some Air Force enlisted man, on a ladder in a missile silo, retrofitting new fuses on a nuclear warhead? See All God's Children Got Guns by Vin Suprynowicz


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Any idiot can criticize. If gun grabbers look at our honorable citizens, and see the enemy, they are my enemy.


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Don't be fooled into trading your rights for a false sense of security...

"For those of us who have fought for it, FREEDOM has a taste that the government protected subject will never taste."


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No Guns For The Mindless Masses, Useful idiots,

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Be Well ~ Be Armed ~ Be Safe ~ Molon Labe!

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

(Is the RKBA still a right if you have to get the government's permission before you can exercise it?)


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"If you ask the public if a nurse getting off work late at night should have a firearm to protect herself, the public says yes."


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I am for guns, including handguns. In light of that I am also adamantly for gun safety and gun education.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

A gun cannot harm anyone unless there is a human being to pull the trigger -- REVREND BILLY GRAHAM

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

American vs. European Crime Rates

A German lawyer, in response to another blog entry, repeated the common European belief that the United States has a much higher crime rate than major European countries. The facts are quite different...

2001 Interpol crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
4161 - US
7736 - Germany
6941 - France
9927 - England and Wales

1995 Interpol crime statistics (rate per 100,000):
5278 - US
8179 - Germany
6316 - France
7206 - England & Wales

Thus the US has a substantially lower crime rate than the major European countries!

It is true that we (USA) have a high murder rate, mostly of criminals killing criminals, but a distressingly large number of people killing their spouses in anger, and the rate of "stranger killings" is rising.
However, the homicide rates have been dropping dramatically as we have been increasing penalties:

Homicide Rate/100,000 by Date in US:
1980 - 10.2
2000 - 5.5

Also, our murder rate is high largely due to the multicultural nature of our society. Inner city blacks, members of a distinct subculture, have a vastly higher criminal and victim homicide rate than our society as an average:

Homicide Offender Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
3.4 - White
25.8 - Black
3.2 - Other
It is often hypothesized that blacks are overrepresented in murder statistics due to racism on the part of police and the justice system. If this were true, one would expect that the race of victims would have significantly different distribution than the race of the perpetrators, but this is not the case:

Homicide Victim Rate/100,000 by Race in US (2000):
3.3 - White
20.5 - Black
2.7 - Other
Thus if you remove homicides committed by blacks (total: 21862, Blacks:9316), and assume a proportionality between number of offenders and number of offenses, you can extrapolate US homicide offender rate of only 2.6/100,000, lower than Germany (3.27) and France (3.91).

One might ask why blacks are singled out. The reason is that inner city blacks are not representative of our culture. The black population is only about 13% of the total, and many blacks do not live in the inner city welfare cultures. Also, dividing the raw numbers into "white", "black" and "other," as was done by the Justice Department, shows that there are more black murderers (9316) than there are white and "other" combined (8346). I do not have statistics breaking out homicide by race AND location, but since most homicides committed by blacks are done in the inner city, the overall black statistic should be a good proxy.

Many, including myself, blame the high inner city crime rate on several factors:

· Misguided welfare policies, which have helped to create a culture of irresponsibility.
· The ideology of racial separatism (black power, etc.) and its relative, multiculturalism and the cult of victimology.
· Centuries of slavery and oppression, which really only came to an end in the 1960-current time period.
· That the dramatic increase in the black crime rate came after the rise of the welfare state and the creation of black racial separatism and victimology suggests the causative nature of those factors.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"As of 2000, Florida ranked No. 4 in population but ranked No. 21 in suicides. Since the right-to-carry law was enacted in Florida the following changes occurred:"

"The homicide rate dropped 36 percent, firearm homicides dropped 37 percent and handgun homicides dropped 41 percent."

"In the 10 states that adopted right-to-carry laws, the results were no change in the suicide rate, a 0.5 percent rise in accidental firearm deaths, a 5 percent decline in rapes, a 7 percent decline in aggravated assaults and an 8 percent decline in murder."

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Government is there to assure that the full force of the law can be brought against me if I discharge that right in a manner that threatens the rights of others. It does not have the authority to deny me those very rights for fear I might misuse them

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

· Isn’t the Second Amendment about the National Guard?
Frankly, no. Serious legal scholars have almost universally agreed that the Second Amendment speaks to the rights of the citizens, not the rights of the states or other communities. Doesn’t it seem incongruous that the Framers would have written one states’ rights amendment into a Bill of Rights that otherwise speaks entirely to the rights of individuals?
Besides, consider that the document in question was written at a time when the gunfire of the American Revolution was still ringing in the ears of the Framers. A “national guard” of the period would have been Tories loyal to King George, hardly an entity the freedom fighters who wrote the Bill of Rights would have wanted to empower.
Historically, you’ll also find that the constitutions written by the separate colonies prior to the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights spoke of firearms ownership specifically as an individual right encompassing personal protection, and not just a tool to facilitate state militias.
· Isn’t a gun just a phallic symbol?
If it was, no man would ever have bought one with a two inch barrel.
· What about the argument that people die in domestic arguments because a gun is within reach of an angry person?
Certainly, those with uncontrollably violent tendencies should not own guns. When asked this question, I always respond with a question: “Could you pick up a gun and kill someone you love because they angered you?”
If the answer is No, I reply, “Then how dare you imply that I, and everyone else, would be that unstable?” If the answer is Yes, I suggest they stop attempting to counsel well-adjusted people and immediately seek psychiatric counseling for their own self-admitted tendency toward acting out impulses of uncontrollable violence.


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I wish all you gun-toting retards would just go create your own nation,
We did. Just who the hell let you into the USA?


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


"There are over 50 million man-years of concealed carry behind us right now. That is four million CCW’s over 12-plus years, in 32, now 33 states. Then there is Vermont, where you never needed any permit."

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

FAQ’s About Doctors

Think about this:
· The number of physicians in the US is 700,000.
· Accidental deaths caused by Physicians per year is 120,000.
· Accidental deaths per physician is 0.171. (US Dept. of Health & Human Services)
Then think about this:
· The number of gun owners in the US is 80,000,000.
· The number of accidental gun deaths per year (all age groups) is 1,500.
· The number of accidental deaths per gun owner is .0000188.
Statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.
FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT ALMOST EVERYONE HAS AT LEAST ONE DOCTOR.
Please alert your friends to this alarming threat. We must ban doctors before this gets out of hand. As a public health measure I have withheld the statistics on lawyers for fear that the shock could cause people to seek medical attention

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

“The Era of Osama lasted about an hour, from the time the first plane hit the tower to the moment the General Militia of Flight 93 reported for duty.”

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

301 Handgun Murders:
DC - 100% gun-banned over 25 years
340,000 population

-V-

300 Handgun Murders:
17 LEGAL Concealed Carry States (combined)
23 MILLION+ population

STATISTICAL SOURCE:

Clinton/Reno/Freeh FBI-DOJ
1999 Uniform Crime Report

SOURCE OF ABOVE FBI/DOJ REPORT:

Liberal (D-CT) US Senator Joe Lieberman

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Human beings understand reason, logic, comprassion,dignity.
Predators understand strength.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"If the "guns-cause-violence" theory is correct why does Virginia, the alleged "easy purchase" source of all those illegal Washington, DC guns, have a murder rate of 9.3 per 100,000, one-ninth of DC's overall homicide rate of 80.6?"
One word - demographics. FWIW, under Jackboot Janet, the (in)Justice Dept. reported that blacks commit homicide at EIGHT times the rate that European-Americans do - and are murdered at FIVE times the European-American rate, almost always by fellow blacks.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Gun control groups love to use the phony statistic of "13 kids per day die from firearms each year". Most of you reading this article know that number includes suicides, accidents and homicides. It also includes children up to 19 years old as well as crime-related deaths. So, if a police officer shoots and kills a 17-year-old armed robber that is counted as one of the "13 kids per day".
I decided to do a little comparison between the number of kids killed by their mothers and the number of children killed with a firearm. I only used kids under the age of 5 for this comparison because they had their own special statistical category called infanticide. Plus, not too many kids under 5 are in gangs or committing suicide so the results would not be skewed.

Children under the age of 5 in the United States are more likely to be killed by their parents than by anyone else. FBI crime stats show that in 1999 parents were responsible for 57% of these murders. Even though women commit less than 13% of all violent crime, they are responsible for about 50% of all parental murders.
These killer moms almost never use a gun to kill their kids. They prefer a more hands-on approach like beating, drowning, shaking, strangling or suffocation. Others will resort to poisoning, stabbing or exposure to the elements. Less than 20% of the cases involved a parent shooting their child to death. (US Dept. of Justice Study, 1988)
In 1999, there were 613 homicides of children under the age of 5. Of these homicides, only 73 were killed with a firearm while 351were killed by a parent! Of the 73 children killed with a firearm, about 20% of those were committed by one of the parents. So, that brings down the number down from 73 to 59. (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1999) That is 351 cases of parents murdering their kids compared to 59 firearm-related homicides in one year. To be fair, I have been mainly discussing mothers. Since around half of all the parental murderers are mothers, that number is about 175. Still, those numbers are staggering.
The numbers seem to indicate that kids have much more to fear from their own mothers than from most gun owners. In fact, legal gun owners are only responsible for less than one percent of all crimes.
I am not anti-mother and I don't want to ban motherhood, but I do support reasonable mom-control laws like background checks, licensing & registration, waiting periods and a limit on the number of children one mother can raise. After all, isn't it worth it if it saves just one child?
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

I think I missed a memo in my journey through womanhood. I mean, at what point did being female become synonymous with being anti-gun?

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Gun Control - Simple Solutions for Simple Minds

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

According to USA Today, the Justice Department stated half of all violent crime not reported. In the year 2000, 6.2 million rapes, armed robbery and assaults were reported.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

It's bad enough that Handgun Control has no facts to back up their claims for the gun control they want passed into law, but they also take data that support gun ownership and twist it beyond recognition!
HCI put out a press release entitled "License to Kill," a play on the term "License to Carry Concealed." "License to Kill" claims that the 3370 license holders who were arrested for a crime means that license holders are 66% more likely to commit a crime than are non license holders.
Here are the real numbers. There were 3679 arrested among license-holders in Texas over a four-year period. The yearly average comes to 671 per 100,000 Texans. That compares to 9,508 per 100,000 arrests for all crimes per year among the rest of the population. In other words, non-licensees get arrested 14 times more than do licensed gun packers.
By the way, getting arrested does not establish guilt. More than half of those arrested are acquitted. Also, about a quarter of the arrests are on felony charges, the rest for misdemeanors.
And the number of murders, attempted murders and manslaughter committed by this group? Well, three -- in four years. That's a license to kill? We should have such a crime wave in Washington, DC where guns are banned -- or in Chicago, or L.A.
The only way I can explain the "66% more likely" number is this: HCI is 66% more likely to get it wrong than just about anybody else.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
After reading Erica Bouza's May 13 account of a lunatic on the loose with a gun and her response to the terror. I know for sure I would rather live next to a registered National Rifle Association member than an illogical-thinking, firearm-phobic scatterbrain.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Safer"? For whom? Such laws claim, ostensibly, to protect law-abiding citizens. Of course, only law-abiding citizens comply with these restrictions -- and at their own peril. Criminals don't care if the weapon they are using comport with the 23,000 federal, state and local gun restrictions already on the books. The Democrat's "incremental encroachment" on the Second Amendment is a thinly-veiled strategy to achieve their ultimate goal of gun confiscation, as Ms. Feinstein made clear after passage of her 1994 legislation: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate...for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it!"

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In Chicago, thousands of Current parolees, and the uncounted thousands of former parolees who live in the neighborhoods, are key to whether Chicago's streets are safe or dangerous.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Since 9/11, a popular bumper sticker has circulated among gun owners. It reads, “The Second Amendment Is Homeland Security.” This is more than just empty rhetoric.
In the last two years especially, street terrorist attacks in Israel have repeatedly been shortstopped by armed Israeli citizens. A terrorist opens fire at a crowded bus stop; a passing Israeli motorist draws his 9mm pistol and cuts him down. A late-arriving security man with an M-16 hoses the twitching terrorist just to make sure.
Another terrorist attempts to trigger an explosive device in a public place. An Israeli housewife draws her pistol and shoots him dead before he can detonate the bomb. The would-be martyr dies alone.
A third terrorist opens fire with an automatic weapon in an Israeli school. What could have been a mass murder on the scale of Columbine or greater is limited to a very short casualty list when Israeli parents and grandparents, who have provided volunteer armed security after receiving state training, open fire and kill him with their concealed pistols.
Note that in each of these episodes, it was an armed citizen who stopped the terror. Not a soldier. Not a security guard. Not a police officer. Just as wolves do not try to seize a lamb under the nose of the sheepdog, terrorists do not strike where armed protectors are known to be present. They scout the turf and select their victims more carefully than that.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The right to self-defense is a fundamental right.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"I offer neither pay, nor quarters, nor food; I offer only hunger, thirst, forced marches, battles and death.
Let him who loves his country with his heart, and not merely with his lips, follow me."
Giuseppe Garibaldi (1849) Italian patriot and soldier


Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Check for your local airing time http://www.pbs.org/whatson/index.html
Fast Facts-
-90% of all violent crimes in the U.S. do not involve firearms of any type. (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, 1998)
-Less than 1% of all firearms will ever be used in the commission of a crime. (FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1994)
-20% of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just six percent of the population—New York, Chicago, Detroit, and Washington, DC—and each has a virtual prohibition on private handguns. (Dr. Gary Kleck, University of Florida using FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1997)
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

As soon as some idiot kills someone else with a gun, liberals want to take guns away from everyone who didn't do it. When will they learn that criminals will always get guns, no matter what the law, and law-abiding people will not kill anyone with theirs except to protect life

XxXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
At your very next opportunity, ask a police officer who will answer what he/she would do if ordered by their department or command to instigate confiscation of all firearms from law abiding citizens in their jurisdiction. After you recover from the answer you receive, then ask what they would do if a citizen refused to surrender that firearm.
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
The era of Osama Bin Laden lasted for about one hour. The Era ended when the Citizen Milita of Flight 93 went into action.
Vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
If there are gun dealers violating the law, then they should be prosecuted. Suing the gun manufacturers is like suing Budweiser because the local 7-11 sells beer to minors.

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
African Americans account for 51 percent of gun homicides and there is a well-heeled, illegal sales machine operating in the Black community. It feeds the domestic war over drug sales and turf in many inner cities and it mysteriously goes unabated, while it is common knowledge that these guns are not made in the Black community and are not sold, for the most part, in gun shops that do legitimate commerce.
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"The risk of being shot is one of the occupational hazards faced by burglars, and rightfully so, says a victims' rights advocate."

"James Sandifer, president of the Louisiana Crime Victims Coalition and Common Sense Against Crime, said he believes the store owner who shot two burglars on Tuesday morning in Alexandria should not be prosecuted."
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"During an interview with Columbus This Week to promote an upcoming Columbus concert with ZZTOP, rocker and Second Amendment-rights activist Ted Nugent had this to say about Ohio's ban on carrying a firearm for self-defense:"

" 'Any obstacles for individuals of proper reputation -- in other words, non-felons -- to ever need any kind of permit for the right to keep and bear arms is an indication of a cultural deprivation at the hands of an apathetic, sheep-like society that embarrasses me, angers me,' he said

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
That's a right. Given the above, how can one carry a gun illegally. The only thing illegal is gun laws, and the police who enforce them.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx









xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Safer"? For whom? Such laws claim, ostensibly, to protect law-abiding citizens. Of course, only law-abiding citizens comply with these restrictions -- and at their own peril. Criminals don't care if the weapon they are using comport with the 23,000 federal, state and local gun restrictions already on the books. The Democrat's "incremental encroachment" on the Second Amendment is a thinly-veiled strategy to achieve their ultimate goal of gun confiscation, as Ms. Feinstein made clear after passage of her 1994 legislation: "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate...for an outright ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them all in, I would have done it!"

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The National Motorists Association, a private group representing and enhancing North American motorists’ rights, has in-depth information on their Roadblock Registry website, including a database of past roadblocks by state, upcoming roadblocks, and registration by the public of newly held roadblocks.
The watchdog group also identifies motorists’ rights at a roadblock in their article “Most Frequently Asked Questions”. They say, “You do not have to answer any questions, particularly questions that would be self-incriminating. . . you cannot be compelled to explain your travel plans, divulge the contents of your vehicle, or in any way converse with law enforcement officers operating a roadblock.”
Regarding searches of your car at a roadblock, the group informs the public, “Your car can only be searched under the following circumstances: You voluntarily give the police permission to search your vehicle. The police have a warrant to search your vehicle. The police have ‘probable cause’ or ‘reasonable suspicion’.” In the latter instance, “They must be able to explain what they think they will find and why they think said items are in your vehicle.” A search conducted against your will, even one that results in possession of illegal items, is an invalid one, and “they can be (and should be) held criminally and civilly liable for conducting an illegal search.”
Other motorists’ rights listed on the above webpage are swift processing at the roadblock with a maximum detainment time of 10-15 minutes or formal action taken by police against the motorist, and legal maneuvers to avoid a roadblock, even U-turns.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
10 posted on 11/06/2003 7:04:44 PM PST by CHICAGOFARMER (Citizen Carry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Cocked and Locked and ready to Rock Bump.

11 posted on 11/06/2003 7:09:03 PM PST by tet68 (Patrick Henry ......."Who fears the wrath of cowards?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Bump for later.

L

15 posted on 11/06/2003 7:40:51 PM PST by Lurker (Some people say you shouldn't kick a man when he's down. I say there's no better time to do it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Cocked and Locked and ready to Rock Bump.

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force you are ruined... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun.

Are we at last brought to such a humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our own self defense?

Where is the difference between having our arms in our possession and under our own direction, and having them under the management of congress?

If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?
- Patrick Henry, The Virginia Ratifying Convention, June, 1788.

17 posted on 11/06/2003 7:43:39 PM PST by tet68 (Patrick Henry ......."Who fears the wrath of cowards?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp; MeeknMing; DoughtyOne; Alamo-Girl; Ragtime Cowgirl; GeronL; ambrose; 45Auto; glock rocks; ...



BUDDA PING





18 posted on 11/06/2003 7:53:33 PM PST by autoresponder ( http://0access.web1000.com/seeBS.gif 0access.web1000.com/see-BS.gif /moreBS.gif)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Bumped and Bookmarked :)
23 posted on 11/06/2003 9:46:27 PM PST by Centurion2000 (Resolve to perform what you ought, perform without fail what you resolve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Whooopeee...Another PsyOps list! Many thanks for my coming werekend reading!
27 posted on 11/06/2003 9:59:19 PM PST by lainde
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
"This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future. - Adolf Hitler, Berlin Day speech, April 15, 1935. "

Not true.

This has been debunked numerous times on FR.

The 1928 German Gun Laws required gun registration and licensing --- several yers before Hitler got power in 1933.

30 posted on 11/06/2003 10:15:59 PM PST by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
A government that fears arms in the hands of its people should also fear the rope!

--General Nathan Bedford Forrest, CSA

********************************

Any government that would attempt to disarm its people is despotic;
and any people that would submit to it deserve to be slaves!

--Stephen F. Austin, 1835

**************************

There exists a law, not written down anywhere, but inborn in our hearts; a law which comes to us not by training or custom or reading; a law which has come to us not from theory but from practice, not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to the law which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right.

--Marcus Tulius Cicero, 106-53 BC

-archy-/-

37 posted on 11/06/2003 11:28:56 PM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Nice work, PsyOp. Back to you in 2 or 3 months after I've had a chance to read it ... ;-}
44 posted on 11/07/2003 5:29:22 AM PST by Phaedrus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The Second, Amendment, contains, only, a single, comma.

--Boris

49 posted on 11/07/2003 8:24:50 AM PST by boris (The deadliest Weapon of Mass Destruction in History is a Leftist With a Word Processor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
And there is this one by Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Vol III, #1901:

"What is to become of constitutions of government, if they are to rest, not upon the plain import of their words, but upon conjectural enlargements and restrictions, to suit the temporary passions and interests of the day? Let us never forget, that our constitutions of government are solemn instruments, addressed to the common sense of the people and designed to fix, and perpetuate their rights and their liberties. They are not to be frittered away to please the demagogues of the day. They are not to be violated to gratify the ambition of political leaders. They are to speak in the same voice now, and for ever. They are of no man's private interpretation. They are ordained by the will of the people; and can be changed only by the sovereign command of the people."

53 posted on 11/07/2003 9:21:32 AM PST by PhilipFreneau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
JAY PRINTZ, SHERIFF/CORONER, RAVALLI COUNTY, MONTANA, PETITIONER 95-1478 v. UNITED STATES RICHARD MACK, PETITIONER 95-1503

on writs of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit [June 27, 1997]

Justice Thomas, concurring.

The Court today properly holds that the Brady Act violates the Tenth Amendment in that it compels state law enforcement officers to "administer or enforce a federal regulatory program." See ante, at 25. Although I join the Court's opinion in full, I write separately to emphasize that the Tenth Amendment affirms the undeniable notion that under our Constitution, the Federal Government is one of enumerated, hence limited, powers. See, e.g., McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 405 (1819) ("This government is acknowledged by all to be one of enumerated powers"). "[T]hat those limits may not be mistaken, or forgotten, the constitution is written." Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 176 (1803). Accordingly, the Federal Government may act only where the Constitution authorizes it to do so. Cf. New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992).

In my "revisionist" view, see post, at 3, the Federal Government's authority under the Commerce Clause, which merely allocates to Congress the power "to regulate Commerce . . . among the several states," does not extend to the regulation of wholly intrastate, point of sale transactions. See United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 584 (1995) (concurring opinion).

Absent the underlying authority to regulate the intrastate transfer of firearms, Congress surely lacks the corollary power to impress state law enforcement officers into administering and enforcing such regulations. Although this Court has long interpreted the Constitution as ceding Congress extensive authority to regulate commerce (interstate or otherwise), I continue to believe that we must "temper our Commerce Clause jurisprudence" and return to an interpretation better rooted in the Clause's original understanding.

Id., at 601; (concurring opinion); see also Camps Newfound/Owatonna, Inc. v. Town of Harrison, 520 U. S. ___, (1997) (Thomas, J., dissenting).

Even if we construe Congress' authority to regulate interstate commerce to encompass those intrastate transactions that "substantially affect" interstate commerce, I question whether Congress can regulate the particular transactions at issue here. The Constitution, in addition to delegating certain enumerated powers to Congress, places whole areas outside the reach of Congress' regulatory authority. The First Amendment, for example, is fittingly celebrated for preventing Congress from "prohibiting the free exercise" of religion or "abridging the freedom of speech."

The Second Amendment similarly appears to contain an express limitation on the government's authority. That Amendment provides: "[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." This Court has not had recent occasion to consider the nature of the substantive right safeguarded by the Second Amendment. [n.1] If, however, the Second Amendment is read to confer a personal right to "keep and bear arms," a colorable argument exists that the Federal Government's regulatory scheme, at least as it pertains to the purely intrastate sale or possession of firearms, runs afoul of that Amendment's protections. [n.2]

As the parties did not raise this argument, however, we need not consider it here. Perhaps, at some future date, this Court will have the opportunity to determine whether Justice Story was correct when he wrote that the right to bear arms "has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic." 3 J. Story, Commentaries §1890, p. 746 (1833).

In the meantime, I join the Court's opinion striking down the challenged provisions of the Brady Act as inconsistent with the Tenth Amendment.

Notes

1 Our most recent treatment of the Second Amendment occurred in United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), in which we reversed the District Court's invalidation of the National Firearms Act, enacted in 1934. In Miller, we determined that the Second Amendment did not guarantee a citizen's right to possess a sawed off shotgun because that weapon had not been shown to be "ordinary military equipment" that could "contribute to the common defense." Id., at 178. The Court did not, however, attempt to define, or otherwise construe, the substantive right protected by the Second Amendment.

2 Marshaling an impressive array of historical evidence, a growing body of scholarly commentary indicates that the "right to keep and bear arms" is, as the Amendment's text suggests, a personal right. See, e.g.,

J. Malcolm, To Keep and Bear Arms: The Origins of an Anglo American Right 162 (1994);

S. Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed, The Evolution of a Constitutional Right (1984);

Van Alstyne, The Second Amendment and the Personal Right to Arms, 43 Duke L. J. 1236 (1994);

Amar, The Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment, 101 Yale L. J. 1193 (1992);

Cottrol & Diamond, The Second Amendment: Toward an Afro Americanist Reconsideration, 80 Geo. L. J. 309 (1991);

Levinson, The Embarrassing Second Amendment, 99 Yale L. J. 637 (1989);

Kates, Handgun Prohibition and the Original Meaning of the Second Amendment, 82 Mich. L. Rev. 204 (1983).

Other scholars, however, argue that the Second Amendment does not secure a personal right to keep or to bear arms. See, e.g.,

Bogus, Race, Riots, and Guns, 66 S. Cal. L. Rev. 1365 (1993);

Williams, Civic Republicanism and the Citizen Militia: The Terrifying Second Amendment, 101 Yale L. J. 551 (1991);

Brown, Guns, Cowboys, Philadelphia Mayors, and Civic Republicanism: On Sanford Levinson's The Embarrassing Second Amendment, 99 Yale L. J. 661 (1989);

Cress, An Armed Community: The Origins and Meaning of the Right to Bear Arms, 71 J. Am. Hist. 22 (1984).

Although somewhat overlooked in our jurisprudence, the Amendment has certainly engendered considerable academic, as well as public, debate.

65 posted on 11/07/2003 12:13:34 PM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
Chief Justice Rehnquist writing the majority opinion in:

United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 264 (1990)

[The question in the case was whether the Fourth Amendment protected foreign citizens on foreign soil from unreasonable searches, or applied only to U.S. soil or U.S. residents. The majority, per Chief Justice Rehnquist, said:]

"For purposes of this case, therefore, if there were a constitutional violation, it occurred solely in Mexico. . . . The Fourth Amendment provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." That text, by contrast with the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, extends its reach only to "the people."

"Contrary to the suggestion of amici curiae that the Framers used this phrase "simply to avoid [an] awkward rhetorical redundancy," "the people" seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution. The Preamble declares that the Constitution is ordained and established by "the People of the United States." The Second Amendment protects "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms," and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments provide that certain rights and powers are retained by and reserved to "the people." See also U.S. Const., Amdt. 1 ("Congress shall make no law . . . abridging . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble") (emphasis added); Art. I, § 2, cl. 1 ("The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States")".

"While this textual exegesis is by no means conclusive, it suggests that "the people" protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community."

68 posted on 11/07/2003 12:32:32 PM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp
The individual's right to bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a 'well regulated militia." Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected. - ACLU, Policy statement #47, 1996.

The ACLU: The most dangerous organization in America.

69 posted on 11/07/2003 12:35:19 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: PsyOp; Eaker; ExSoldier; Squantos; harpseal; PatrioticAmerican; *bang_list; Mulder; Jeff Head; ...
Awesome collection! Thanks!

Bookmark it Danno!


76 posted on 11/07/2003 2:05:48 PM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-56 next last

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