Posted on 01/25/2008 9:59:59 AM PST by JRochelle
And yet he is able to hold the two contradictory concepts of the 2A as an individual right, and support for an "assault weapon" ban in his mind at the same time. Does this mean that he has a trans-dimensional brain the size of a planet, or simply that he doesn't really understand what the Second Amendment says or what it means?
Would it make any difference if it was a box of .22 Shorts?
You see it all the time, especially inside the beltway. Individual "rights" only extend as far as the legislators and bureaucrats neglect to regulate them out of existence.
And yet he is able to hold the two contradictory concepts of the 2A as an individual right, and support for an "assault weapon" ban in his mind at the same time. Does this mean that he has a trans-dimensional brain the size of a planet, or simply that he doesn't really understand what the Second Amendment says or what it means?
Finally, while NRA strongly disagrees with many of the arguments in DOJ’s brief, there are a few areas of agreement. Notably, DOJ agrees that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, and that it applies to the District, even strongly hinting that under the lower “heightened scrutiny” it supports that D.C laws could be unconstitutional. This was not the position of the previous administration. In fact, Clinton administration Attorney General Janet Reno and Solicitor General Seth Waxman, along with other DOJ officials from the Clinton administration have filed their own brief in support of the District, arguing that there is no individual right at all to possess guns outside of government service. http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Federal/Read.aspx?id=3388
You either going to get a President who holds that the 2nd is a individual right or one who believes that individuals do not have right to own weapons at all.
Now, Romney is far better with his 'B' ranking then any Democrat.
If you want to vote for another Republican in the primary who is stronger on gun rights, as I am doing, that is fine, but once the general election comes, the Democrat is not an option for supporters of the 2nd Amendment.
I’m with you. I voted for Fred. I will vote for Mitt in the General and hope we can mold him, while sending contributions only to GOA, NRA, DU, and the like.
THat it was not renewed shows how desperate you are to tout a victory.
Not desperate, but happy.
I am willing to call a victory a victory, espically since there was such intense pressure by the Left to keep it on the books.
Had the Democrats been in control of Congress it would have been.
[ The right to own weapons is being discussed as a personal right for the first time in decades. ]
Yep, before it was taken for granted.
Not by the Democrats it isn't.
Note in Miller the scotus did not rule the collective right, but tha the weapon involved was not a militia weapon. Of course, a little defense (Miller was dead), might have pointed out that a short barrelled shotgun has numerous applications as a military weapon, thus the premise of the ruling was in error: the court was misinformed.
[ But for some reason Conservatives have this penchant for predicting the imminent end of the freedom, so lets just forget our responsibilities to vote. ] Yes! Because complacency guarantees the end of freedom. If every statute is not studied in its worst light, its greatest potential abuse, then it will eventually be used that way. Best to nip it in the bud.
Best to stop it before it gets started.
Were any new gun control laws enacted when the GOP controlled congress?
Keep in mind, too, that we are the ones who have had our core issues nibbled away at by the herd who would mouth nonsense about waiting until next time, about lesser evils, and how you get 80%, so what if you don't get the other 20? No loss of freedom is tolerable to conservatives, it is those who tout compromise who are selling our liberty piecemeal for convenience.
No, it those who are advocating 'dropping out' that is ensuring that the next generation will have less freedom then ours.
[ One thing that conservatives could learn from liberals is their eternal optimism and determination. ]
First, we are about as determined as it gets. We are still here, even though the purveyors of Republican-ism have crapped on us time and time again. We have not given up.
Really?
The Left has been working to socialize this nation for decades and don't give up because they haven't obtained their goal.
Second, I have a positive attitude. I am positive, that given any advantage, pecuniary or otherwise, my government will continue to amass to itself power at the expense of my liberty. That is human nature, and to get starry-eyed and start doing the happy-feely kumbaya bit might work for the socialists' drones, but they are oblivious to the freedom they are losing in the process.
No, they are confident that they will win in the end and thus, they continue moving forward, while Conservatives retreat and make no attempts to actually roll back socialism.
[ No matter how often they are defeated, they keep coming because they have faith in their cause. ]
As do we. Faith in our cause, in God, in the ultimate desire of people to live secure, productive, and happy lives--and to pass those freedoms, that security, and the fruits of our labors on to our progeny.
No, you are not 'coming back' you are advocating giving up.
[ The biggest difference is in how we desire to attain that goal. ]
I have a mother and a father, God Bless them, and I learned the concepts of personal responsibility at their knee. I do not need the State to act as a surrogate, not then, and certainly not now, when I am a great-grandfather.
And who does?
[ Would that conservatives had that same kind of faith in theirs, instead of 'I am going to hunker down with my rifle and ammo and wait for the United States to collapse'. ]
Perhaps a few do have that idea in mind, but most of us would rather prevent that collapse. If you or anyone else wants an idea what happens to a modern city in a year of warfare, look at Sarajevo, the jewell of the Balkans, and site of the Winter olympics (I forget the year). No one wants that for America except our enemies. No one wants to live like East Germany in the '60s either.
Well, the way to prevent that politically is at the voting booth.
But, in extremis, the rifle and ammo are there--and will continue to be, regardless.
If it comes to that, then we have failed when we had a chance to change things peacefully.
And Mitt Romney will be a fine president as well, and I doubt he’ll be signing any such bill.
And since he would have signed the assault weapons ban, I’m sure he would gladly sign a machine gun ban.
You’re right - I already cast my vote for the best 2A supporter in the primary, but at least Romney is potentially educable on the issue. You can cure ignorance, such as ignorance of the similarities between “assault weapons” and ordinary semi-automatic hunting rifles.
Even if Romney isn’t the staunchest 2nd Amendment advocate out there, he is still no worse than McCain on the issue, indeed he is better, and above all, McCain’s pro-amnesty position I believe must be the deciding deal-breaking factor.
If McCain is the GOP nominee, I will vote for him.
Huckabee is the only one I would not vote for, though it doesn’t look like there is any threat of that.
However, Romney is the best option given the poverty of choices.
Don’t blame the candidates who are running, though.
Blame the ones who are not.
And blame all the idiots who didn’t vote for Fred Thompson.
McCain wants more amnesty for illegals, Julie-Annie wants to give them welfare and Hickabee wants to give both.
Romney is the last option left. The rest can go to hell...
Standing up on the national stage next to a short, fat old hag, the last thing the Republicans need is a weak, frail old man.
Romney is a vibrant, healthy man and like it or not, in our image driven society, it is solely that image that will elect him.
"A" short barreled shotgun, maybe. But not Miller's.
"thus the premise of the ruling was in error: the court was misinformed."
The court was not misinformed. The court was not informed, period. They remanded the case for further clarification.
Of course I understand that. But since Ann has more or less endorsed Mitt, I want to see how she responds to him stating that he would sign an assault weapons ban.
Conservatives have come to a sad crossroads where we're all having to choose between the lesser of evils.
BTTT!
You see, in their eyes, he is perfect. He could never lie.
He is a temple-worthy Mormon, that means more than anything.
Try buying a house for less than $800K in the SF Bay Area, and see if you want to live there. My guess is that it’ll turn into a rental unit before you memorize your new address and tele number.
Take your socialist class envy somewhere that it fits in; here ain’t it.
There is a big difference between a government "licensing" a right, and private organization, religious or not, controlling access to its facilities.
Many high tech companies control access to their facilities in order to protect their trade secrets. I suppose you have a problem with that too. (My wife did some consulting for TI, they searched her purse coming and going, something other parts of TI, who did defense work, did not do. In fact the badge that all TI employees wore, which would get you into the facilities of the defense group, (but not into "certain areas") would not get you into those the areas used by the part that made commerical products sold at retail).
The most disturbing part of all this is that we must have a lobby group like the NRA in DC to defend our Constitutional 2A rights. None of this would be necessary if the Congress and the President would honor our Constitution.
The most disgusting part about it all is how some sheeple
brag about these brokered deals involving what is our God given as well as Constitutional right to protect and defend ourselves.
Bottom line, our God given and Constitutional rights to protect and defend our lives, our families, and our property are non-negotiable. The fact they have been brokered away with restrictive measures should be a wake up call for all.
I consider any politician complicit in these brokered deals an enemy of freedom.
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.