Posted on 01/14/2008 5:41:31 AM PST by servantboy777
Since "unrestricted' private ownership of guns clearly threatens the public safety, the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted to allow a variety of gun restrictions, according to the Bush administration.
The argument was delivered by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement in a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the ongoing arguments over the legality of a District of Columbia ban on handguns in homes, according to a report from the Los Angeles Times.
Clement suggested that gun rights are limited and subject to "reasonable regulation" and said all federal limits on guns should be upheld.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Since it is not semi-automatic, I presume that it is Kalifornia legal. It's ironic that we have the FFL infringement in Kalifornia to help keep us out of trouble with respect to all the other infringements. It takes a lot of expertise to know what's legal here anymore.
That’s still plenty to transport a wide range of Gatling guns, Rotary Cannons, an Automatic Mortar or even an M119A1 Light Howitzer (4,250lbs.)
Think BIG.....like the Powell Doctrine of Overwhelming Firepower.....(of course that was before he got sissified in the State Department.....)
You're thinking "tubular magazine".
You're correct. I don't think I had ever seen a pump action gun without a tubular magazine. Are there many others that you are aware of?
Being familiar with the AR design, as soon as I saw the picture of the DPMS version it was clear just how easy to design it would be.
I'm not sure I need one. I have a "pistol-grip-deficient" version that works well enough. I'm surpised at the $1700 price shown on the DPMS web site. That's pretty pricey. Almost what I paid for my Armalite AR-10.
Nor do I.
I can think of at least two non-pump guns with tubular magazines, but no pump guns with non-tubular magazines.
My fear...Americans are so blind, we are going to have another just like Bush in office next year.
This whole slate of candidates just plain stink.
Where are all the conservatives? Where are all the statesmen?
All we get are career politicians....and everyone is rushing to embrace them. Just makes me ill.
McCain???? Huckabee???? Romney???? Thompson????
This nation is in deep ca-ca.
...and when presented with a truly conservative candidate, one who believes in and tries to do his job according to the ideals of the founders, the party won't have him.
I very much do not understand this.
Now, I have changed my mind. Though weak, the US brief is treason.
The argument in the US brief is that the right of US citizens to keep and bear arms is no more than the common law right to use arms in defense of self and state.
This is equivalent to stating: "The protection of the right to keep and bear arms of the citizens of Boston in 1791 under the US Constitution was no different than the protection of the right of those same citizens of Boston on April 19th, 1775; the date when government troops killed their own citizens while attempting to disarm them."
The weakness of the argument lulled me into believing that the Supreme Court would view such an argument with the scorn that it deserves. Unfortunately, I am guilty of assuming the best when I should be preparing for the worst.
I will be writing letters explaining the above to both the President of the United States and to the Solicitor General of the United States. The issue is too important to permit this brief, however weak and wrong, from going unchallenged by those who know better.
Nope, but gun-grabbing tyrants sure are. ...and for good reason.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.