Skip to comments.
Justices Signal They're Ready To Make Gun Ownership A National Right
LATimes ^
| March 02, 2010
| David G. Savage
Posted on 03/02/2010 6:30:33 PM PST by Steelfish
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-90 next last
To: Freedom_Is_Not_Free
That is true. There’s clearly abusive agents within the BATF, much as there are abusive agents inside the FBI. There needs to be a law whereby such abusive agents lose their jobs and their sovereign immunity to civil claims for damages and compensation.
61
posted on
03/02/2010 10:46:21 PM PST
by
NVDave
To: Graybeard58
I do beive that may be true. I’ve work hard on some campaigns in NW IL...only to be defeated in the larger cities. Conservative wins in the local towns though.
62
posted on
03/02/2010 11:23:32 PM PST
by
b cool
To: Inyo-Mono
Just to provide a bit of historical context:
- the anti-gun laws were a reaction to the assassinations that occurred in the 1960’s
- we had another round (pun intended) of anti-gun sentiment following the 1981 assassination attempt on Ronald Reagan and the severe wounding of James Brady.
- the assassinations contributed to the Europeans’ sense of superiority, since weapons are banned in most EU countries.
63
posted on
03/02/2010 11:28:14 PM PST
by
The Doctor
("They work for us. Take back government from those we can't trust.")
To: Monorprise
Now the Idiots in the NRA will be solidly on the side of maintainable incorporation. Gun rights wont be safe either because now not only will the States have them reasonable exceptions to gun rights, the Federal government will have EXACTLY the same justification to impose the same reasonable exceptions.I'm sure that there will be another court case on the meaning of the word "infringed," and the Ninth Circuit will rule that "infringed" means "shot all to bloody hell," while the Fifth Circuit will rule that it means "unsullied by government law or regulation," and that glaring conflict between the Circuits will be a key basis for granting certiorari.
Like Heller, this case is not the end of the battle, it's the beginning, though it looks to become a major victory and a foundation for what's to come.
64
posted on
03/03/2010 2:07:36 AM PST
by
mvpel
(Michael Pelletier)
To: Secret Agent Man
McCain was far from perfect but we could have had Palin as a slam dunk in another few years. Some freepers still don’t get it.
65
posted on
03/03/2010 4:03:37 AM PST
by
Shooter 2.5
(NRA /Patron - TSRA- IDPA)
To: NVDave
It has to be noted that it was NOT the NRA who is responsible for this result, No, it was a guy who doesn't even own a gun who started the process at a time when we were going to lose. Enter Alito and Roberts. Thank you President Bush. It's also only the Second Amendment Foundation and the National Rifle Association who are taking advantage of Heller. The other gun groups either aren't interested or don't have the funds.
66
posted on
03/03/2010 4:09:29 AM PST
by
Shooter 2.5
(NRA /Patron - TSRA- IDPA)
To: Steelfish
I suggest that 'Da Mare', King Richie II, Duke of Cook, Earl of IL and Baron of Bridgeport, move into his 'private suite' at Northwestern Memorial Hospital asap.
As when SCOTUS rules against him and his 39 pages of gun laws, he's going to have massive cardiac. Or, his head will just explode like a giant zit.
The 2nd option, though fatal, would be a lot funnier to see on the front page the Tribune.
67
posted on
03/03/2010 4:34:16 AM PST
by
Condor51
(The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits [A. Einstein])
To: sig226
Amen brother!
Eight years of Gore or Kerry could have done in the 2nd A.
To: Steelfish
No, the justices are about to RECOGNIZE a right that ALWAYS existed, but was previously ignored by Big Government!
To: Steelfish
To Make Gun Ownership A National Right
The 2A already does this. Why is this even a question?
Only shows how far this nation has fallen.
70
posted on
03/03/2010 5:12:48 AM PST
by
Red in Blue PA
(If guns cause crime, then all of mine are defective!)
To: Graybeard58
Chicago, Cook County and East St. Louis.
71
posted on
03/03/2010 5:14:34 AM PST
by
DuncanWaring
(The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
To: mvpel
This is why I hate lawyers and most judges.
The 2A could not be more clear if you tried wordsmithing it, yet all of these people dance around what it truly means.
72
posted on
03/03/2010 5:15:17 AM PST
by
Red in Blue PA
(If guns cause crime, then all of mine are defective!)
To: Balding_Eagle
Great. It’s recognized that I can own a weapon now. How about the ammunition now?
To: Gilbo_3
normally Id BUMP a rant like that, but I wont cause I know that bambam is lurkin the bang_list today...8^}...
You stupid Friging Jerk. You are a prime example of someone who has no backbone - therefore you think that everyone else is without courage and the strength of their conviction.
I don't Need (Nor Want) your concern for my safety to protect me from a "gone wild" government. I put my name and opinion out there for the very reason I want them to try to take action.
You can try and find someone meek and mild who is afraid of their own shadow as well as afraid of our government (it should be the other way around), but don't try and protect those of us who have the gumption to stand and be counted.
74
posted on
03/03/2010 6:19:02 AM PST
by
jongaltsr
(It)
To: Regulator
They aren’t going to “make” diddly.
However, it is good that they affirm the existing God-given right.
75
posted on
03/03/2010 6:20:20 AM PST
by
MrB
(The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
To: Freddd
The Constitution doesn’t “give” inalienable rights.
76
posted on
03/03/2010 6:21:13 AM PST
by
MrB
(The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
To: Graybeard58
Anywhere you have a city of any size you have liberals They do tend to be "hive creatures", don't they...
It has to do with their inadequacy to take care of themselves.
77
posted on
03/03/2010 6:22:36 AM PST
by
MrB
(The difference between a humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
To: randomhero97
It's an Inalienable Right, meaning a natural right. This dog and pony show shouldn't even be necessary. Bears repeating!
78
posted on
03/03/2010 6:51:46 AM PST
by
beltfed308
(Heller: The defining moment of our Republic)
To: jongaltsr
Oathkeepers.
III percenter. Alarm and Muster. NRA Life member. I still kick some money to GOA and SAF.
If you want more out of me, you will have to wait until CWII gets rolling in earnest. I don't plan on bleeding too much before then.
79
posted on
03/03/2010 6:56:31 AM PST
by
Dead Corpse
(III, Oathkeeper)
To: Steelfish
No, the justices are about to RECOGNIZE a right that ALWAYS existed, but was previously ignored by Big Government!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-90 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson