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

To: Jim Verdolini
if all the federal supreme court precident prohibits the feds from limiting ones ability to privately own arms suitable for a militia, how did they manage to pass the assault weapons ban?

Actually the Supreme Court never stooped to accept a case challenging the AWB. Plus the Congress and the President rarely consider the Courts precedents or the Constitution in passing laws these days (they once did, as when they "got around" the lack of power to ban or regulate guns by taxing the snot out of them, ignoring the fact that they can't use powers that they do have to violate the rights protected by the Bill of Rights, that being the whole point of passing the BoR in the first place.)

191 posted on 01/18/2005 9:06:26 PM PST by El Gato (Activist Judges can twist the Constitution into anything they want ... or so they think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]


To: El Gato

“Actually the Supreme Court never stooped to accept a case challenging the AWB. Plus the Congress and the President rarely consider the Courts precedents or the Constitution in passing laws these days (they once did, as when they "got around" the lack of power to ban or regulate guns by taxing the snot out of them, ignoring the fact that they can't use powers that they do have to violate the rights protected by the Bill of Rights, that being the whole point of passing the BoR in the first place.)”

Exactly and well said. We can pontificate about our “rights” all day but unless the Congress or the Courts agree, the rights simply have no effect in law.




301 posted on 01/19/2005 9:13:58 AM PST by Jim Verdolini
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies ]

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