Replies

Thanks, you're probably one of the few members of this forum who understands that achieving a good thing via unconstitutional means will come back to haunt us. This "law" could have just as easily been written to reaffirm that all citizens have the right to concealed carry...or that none do.

I support the right to keep and bear arms for every citizen, not just a federally-mandated special class. Once the federal government ordains itself to determine who may bear arms and where, they also ordain themselves to determine who may not carry arms and where.

Question: Aren't the laws against former felons owning weapons federal laws? Perhaps that was the precedent that allowed this latest assault on federalism.

Furthermore, I support being able to carry without fear when I drive or fly across the country. But does not the "full faith and credit" clause in the U.S. Constitution already apply here?

I agree with you that Bush's signing this was deplorable even though I support the end result. The common thread running through his presidency has been his quest to federalize everything he touches.

I am very suspicious of new laws which grant us a right we already have. You're right. This one is a trojan horse.

snopercod:

Once the federal government ordains itself to determine who may bear arms and where, they also ordain themselves to determine who may not carry arms and where.

Unfortunately true.

That is why the Democrats were for this (yet another) extra-Constitutional [b]reach.

Your question about former felons --- I am not sure exactly, but it seems that there are both State and federal laws. (I'd be looking them up, as would you, if curious to know more about that.)

Regarding our rights to keep and bear Arms, the Second Amendment affirms the right nationally, not only within the States.

If mustered, then Presidential authority is required to move as a State militia beyond that State, except for when the President may be incapacitated, in which case the governors of the States affected by some national emergency, may act and order the milita to respond outside their borders. Generally, the point here, is that as individuals or small parties, we are free to keep and bear Arms across State lines and anywhere in U.S. territories, and the Second Amendment affirms this right.

Bush should have had the guts to not sign the bill and then restate the Second Amendment's affirmation of our right.

Of course, Bush did not do that because his vast retinue of lawyers are culpably a blank slate on the matter, too.