Posted on 03/18/2007 9:59:26 AM PDT by Clintonfatigued
By striking down the District of Columbia's extraordinarily strict gun control law, which essentially bans guns, a federal appeals court may have revived gun control as a political issue. It has been mostly dormant since autumn 2000, when Al Gore decided he was less interested in it than in carrying states such as Michigan and Pennsylvania: "Gore Tables Gun Issue as He Courts Midwest" [New York Times, Sept. 20, 2000]. The appeals court ruling appalls advocates of gun control laws and should alarm the Democratic Party.
The court ruled 2 to 1 that the D.C. law, which allows only current and retired police officers to have handguns in their homes, violates the Constitution's Second Amendment: "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."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
I don't know if this is a shot in the arm for the GOP, but it is a shot in the arm for Constitutionalism, which has not been doing all that well lately.
--the Demotraitors will just lie about it in pertinent elections anyway--
Correction:
The three media darlings in the Repulican race for the White House are all big gun grabbers. ?? better?
As far as I can tell, their records are mixed on that issue. But I haven't researched it in depth.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Much better said, thanks.
"The appeals court ruling appalls advocates of gun control laws and should alarm the Democratic Party."
Now why should this be so? The appeals court was only following the clear intent of the constitution. If they (Democrats and/or gun control advocates) wish to ban guns, they need only pass a constitutional amendment. See, that's what the rule of law means...not stacking a court with people who will reinterpret the law to mean whatever you want. After all, if their ideas (on gun control) are so good, certainly they will have no problem gathering the necessary support, right?
Yes.
It's a boost... but it's just reclaiming something you had already owned.
The dissenting judge was appointed by an "R". Bush #41 specifically.
The one man most responsible for this is not a Republican:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1802687/posts
A Shot in the Arm for the GOP
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1802733/posts Posted by rdb3
On News/Activism 03/18/2007 9:07:40 AM CDT · 39 replies · 779+ views
WP ^ | 18 MARCH 2007 | George F. Will
"As far as I can tell, their records are mixed on that issue. But I haven't researched it in depth."
Nor have I. All three are grabbers to some extent. John McCain was a supporter of the awb. Rudy has ben a fan of "gun control" for some time. And Mitt Romney hasn't been much better, although he has been trying to recharacterize himself of late.
About the "best" of the top three, and I use that term loosely, would be Mitt Romney. Frankly, the top three choices in my view are nonchoices, and are only distinguished by the fact that they're better than what my party is touting.
We're in for a long four or eight years on gun rights unless the GOP or Democratic party is willing to run someone approaching a conservative for the Presidency. And that looks less likely over time. Our best bet of late seems to be working in the state legislatures as well as (ironically) in the courts.
There is also the fact that neither party is particularly eager to take on the gunnies politically, so I wouldn't expect dramatic changes absent a complete take over by one party or the other. Even then, I wouldn't be too pessimistic as gunnies are about the only conservatives who have figured out some winning formulas for practical conservative politics. From a cost/benefit point of view, it doesn't make much sense.
There is the possibility that former U.S. Senator Fred Thompson (currently starring on "Law & Order" as a D.A.) will run, and his record on guns is good.
Well, duh. I'm glad somebody actually noticed that.
And if Fred Thompson doesn't run, we should throw all our support to Duncan Hunter.
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.