[xsrdx]

RKBA PING

[Gondring]

EXCELLENT!

About time the Brady Center got an English and history lesson!

[Puppage]

the Second Amendment explicitly recognizes the right of individual Americans to own and carry firearms

Of course it does. The Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) is by & for The People. The gun grabbers know this, yet they say it's a state right. Yeah, the Bill of Rights is by & for The people....every amendment, except THAT one!

And, the 1st amendment give the state the right to speak out about it's self. FROM MY COLD, DEAND HANDS!

[HMFIC]

I LOVE the idea of Sarah "STALIN" Brady's sphincter puckering up over this memo!

SUCK IT UP BABY!

[RBroadfoot]

I've read much of the AG report and find it comprehensive and well-reasoned.

However, I find it astounding that lawyers can write 113 pages to explain the obvious intent of 27 words.

Less astounding, perhap, is the need to refute the musings of other lawyers and judges that deny the obvious intent of those 27 words.

[VRWCmember]

Dennis Henigan, director of the Brady Center's Legal Action Project, also spoke against the "individual rights" interpretation of the Second Amendment at James Madison University in 2002. "Both the language and history of the Second Amendment show that its subject matter was not individual rights," Henigan said, "but rather the distribution of military power in society between the states and the federal government."

Using very basic reading comprehension skills, the only reasonable conclusion one can draw from these two sentences is that Dennis Henigan is either (1) a complete idiot, or (2) a despicable liar.

[susiek]

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.

US Const Amend. II

[newgeezer]

"The Omega will come when the Supreme Court begins to overturn selected gun control laws based on the fact that they do infringe upon the individual right protected in the Constitution."

Correction. The Omega will come when the SCOTUS is FINISHED overturning those laws.

[MinstrelBoy]

The second amendment. First in the hearts of many because it secures the rest of them!

[stevio]

One major reason I'm glad Bush is there instead of what's-his-name.

[NRA1995]

Interesting note.....the DUmmies are beginning to believe in the 2nd Amendment because they're so scared of Karl Rove

[two23]

Bump and thanks for posting

[OXENinFLA]

Sweet!

[Grut]

Unless the Bush administration translates this into action, it's meaningless. So far, they've taken the position that while RKBA is an individual right, no existing law - including the prohibition of firearms in the District of Columbia - infringes on the 'reasonable' regulation of that right.

In other words, this is just so much shuck and jive.

[Badray]

""Both the language and history of the Second Amendment show that its subject matter was not individual rights," Henigan said, "but rather the distribution of military power in society between the states and the federal government.""

Hmmm.

He is either a stupid SOB or he is a lying POS SOB. I'm not sure that it matters much which one it is as his opinions are totally worthless either way.

[Joe Brower]

More good RKBA news to brighten you day. $:-)

Just a few years ago, when we were fighting tooth and nail against the myriad and unrelenting attacks by the Clinton adminstration, who would have thought we'd ever be seeing anything like this from the FedGov?

All a matter of keeping the right folks at the helm.

Click the pic to go to the Gun Facts v4.0 download page!

[Grampa Dave]

Jake Reno must be shaking in overdrive after reading this.

[snowsislander]

We are getting there.

Now let's see if we cannot repeal some of the legislation that abridges the 2nd Amendment: the 1934 NFA, the 1938 FFA, and the 1968 GCA would be a nice start. If I had my druthers, I think the GCA is the right start -- some state laws depend on it, and it would knock a hole in them also if the GCA were gone.

[elbucko]

,not a collective right that may only be invoked by a State or a quasi-collective right..

There is no such thing as a "Collective Right", quasi or otherwise. The term is an oxymoron. Just because the two words "collective" and "rights" can be used together in a sentence does not give them a true meaning.

"Collective Rights" is an abstract painting of something that does not exist. It's a word fraud. The minute a "Right" is collectivized, it becomes regulated and no longer guaranteed. It becomes deniable and is no longer a "Right".

[lodwick]

One hundred three pages to explain what is plainly stated in ONE sentence?

Our tax $$$ hard at work.