Supreme Court Sidesteps Gun Rights Case

Newsday ^ | December 1, 2003 | Gina Holland

[MrFreedom]

We now have a United Nation Supreme Court
a package of 34 treaties, all of which were ratified by a show of hands -- no recorded vote.http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a325b3f5d31.htm
Annan in historic meeting with Supreme Court &Congress/is believed to be unprecedented.http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b0c30a81760.htm

[autoresponder]

timing is everything

you cannot push a jackass with a rope

I'd say the lefties on SCOTUS were also afraid to touch this case

legacy in their remaining years and all

a negative decision would have really sealed the fate of elected dems for years to come

[harpseal]

The Silvera case was on point enough that by taking it a re4manding it to the trial court with an affiramtion of the RKBA they would have dealt with the issues at hand. Clearly the AWB is unconstitutional as aare almost the other gun laws on the books.

I am familiar with teh arguments about Silvera not being as good a case as Parker but I remind you in the past the Court has freed some obviously guilty defendants just to make a point. (Miranda)

[bc2]

I also have archived a copy of the Senate report, located at http://thinkforyourself.us/rkba1982.htm

[MrFreedom]

TEN REASONS WHY THE SUPREME COURT SHOULD HEAR SILVEIRA V. LOCKYER and DECIDE THERE IS AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS UNDER THE SECOND AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS http://keepandbeararms.com/Silveira/TenReasons.asp

[Joe Brower]

More and more it becomes obvious that the federal government today has become exactly the overreaching and unresponsive totalitarian leviathan that the found fathers feared it would.

Smart men, they were. I pray that we show the same resolve and self-sacrifice that they did, when our time comes.

I hope you're feeling better, harpseal.

[drypowder]

The whole premise of the Constitution is painfully obvious, it is to "control the Government not the citizens". This is just another example of how really F#$*ed we are as a free society. And our defence is focused on Al Quiada et al from taking our freedoms quickly while our own Government takes them slowly. Ha!

[eskimo]

When was the last time we had a "Conservative" Court? Hell, we've got both houses of Congress and the Presidency and we can't even get replacement judges VOTED ON, much less approved.

Yes, the script for that soap opera known as the federal farce can not even be deemed plausible anymore.

[Let's Roll]

I'm willing to give it until after the next election. I really believe we will finally have true realignment after November 2004.

[B4Ranch]

Get US Out of the United Nations ASAP!

This is what Bush is kissing up to.... open borders, globalism, New World Order and Agenda 21 all come from the United Nations.

Dog Gone, I would rather fight a bad ruling than wait for confiscation which is just around the corner!

[coloradan]

Sorry, but the NRA is pushing a law to allow registration in DC, which would moot the DC handgun ban and therefore moot the Parker VS. DC case. Hence, SCOTUS could easily decline to hear that case as well.

[Dog Gone]

A bad ruling could cause confiscation. I prefer to wait until we get the judges in place to give us a good ruling.

[Badray]

bttt

[mict42]

The Bill of Rights grants rights to individuals. Wrong? This begs the question, would a people move to reacquire the rights that have been levied away? Time will tell. Only,time.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

I hope you are very young.

You will have to wait until time resets itself and then a few thousand years after that.

[yarddog]

Although I truly despise O'Connor and think she was one of Reagans worst mistakes, she has voted ok on gun control, at least that is what my poor memory recalls.

It is probably best that this court did not hear it anyway.

[jdege]

I'm willing to give it until after the next election. I really believe we will finally have true realignment after November 2004.

I don't.

I expect that after 2004, the Dems will have 43 seats in the Senate, instead of 49, and they'll still have the power to filibuster, but it will be harder for them to do it, so they'll become more recalcitrant, and more extreme, and in fact, more dangerous, than they are now.

I see 2004-2008 as being the most dangerous period of politics in our history since 1854-1860.

[Lazamataz]

There will come a time, in the future, when the deactivation of ammunition will be possible at a distance.

Don't ask me the physics, I don't know. But someday, it will come to pass.

Once they can disarm us in a defacto fashion, with no risks to themselves, THEN they will declare that there is no individual rights to firearms. They are cowards -- so not a moment before.

And never again in human future history will the common population be allowed to own modern weaponry. They learned their lesson with the United States. We were too free for far too long.

[MrFreedom]

." Why on God's green earth should we allow a hostile U.N organization to dictate our foreign policy?

[sandydipper]

Gentelmen cry Peace! - Peace! but there is no peace. Don't ever forget that it was farmers and the general population that responded to the call for arms. If not for individual gun ownership the revolution would have been lost before it began.

Someone needs to pull the Supreme's heads out of their collective butts. This could be a wake up call.