Posted on 03/18/2008 9:25:56 AM PDT by NinoFan
Pres.Bush laid out things he believed CFR should do while the congressional debate was occurring, but he reiterated he would sign whatever they passed, as he had promised during his presidential campaign, stating, in effect, “I’ve already run my last campaign. This is up to you and the way it affects your constituents”. Unfortunately, he kept his word, and carried out that campaign promise.
And, yes, most people I know who looked at the result believed it would be declared unConstitutional, but unfortunately the SC ruled otherwise on the first test. I believe that if it could be brought up to them again, now, with the change in the court’s composition, it would be struck down... at least many parts of it. I look forward to the next test of that abomination as much as I have looked forward to this gun case.
That is great news! I just hope it stays good news.
Back in 1787, how could you stop a (freed) felon from owning a cannon? There were no records that a seller could reference that showed a stranger's criminal record, or even verify his identity unless he were somebody personally known to the seller. Back then, if a person was judged too dangerous to have a weapon, then he was too dangerous to be loose on the streets, and was either kept locked up or executed
And regarding your prior post: you have no way of knowing if your neighbor has done his paperwork and approvals to own a machinegun. The government knows, but you dont
screw the transcript, where can i hear the audio version?
C-Span.org has a link to the entire audio track on their main page. You’ll need REAL Player to listen.
damn, i hate real player....will DL to hear this though....I want to know if I need to sell my machineguns now, or hang on to them....
Aside from the arguing with your absolutist, Utopian libertarian positions at the moment, I’ll say, considering you and I are are on the “right” side of this...
...I’m listening to the Oral Argument now on C-SPAN — and it seems clear that Anthony Kennedy (of the famous “wimp bloc”) is on the conservative side!
If Heller loses, the status quo is maintained.
If Heller wins, Section 922(o) might fall in a few years, or be diminished allowing new registrations on a Form 1. If that happens, your collection will be worth dimes on the dollar.
They were nevertheless known to their local law enforcement personnel. That is why they so often moved. I live in Wisconsin. Northern Wisconsin and the U.P. were flooded by various kinds of people in trouble with the law, back in teh logging and mining hey-day.
Just 75 years ago, prior to the National Firearms Act of 1934, it was perfectly legal for an American to buy a machinegun, paying anonymously with cash
Just 40 years ago, it was legal for Americans to buy handguns and semi-auto rifles without any requirement for ID, nor any record keeping
Currently, I'd like a return to pre-1968 conditions, but I wouldn't complain about a return to pre-1934
In post 341, your comparison to driving is seriously flawed. Driving is a privledge that may be removed by the Government at any time. It is not enumerated in the Constitution at all. The 2nd Amendment however is an inalienable right that is enumerated in the Constitution. By comparing the two, you are basically saying that Rights have no meaning at all. Becareful how you compare things.
On the subject of “yelling fire in a theater” posted earlier by another poster, it’s flawed as well. We all have the ability to yell “fire”. The laws regarding it are not prohibitive but punitive (sp?). The ability to yell fire is not removed but punishment for using your right to encite panick.
Mike
As a “mouth-breathing idiot” as you so rudely say, I paid quite careful attention to the tone and commentary of the Justices. The Justices continually deviated from the narrow scope of the appeal, not the attorneys. The Justices brought up machine guns, not the attorneys. The Justices brought up national level laws, not the attorneys.
The Justices are going to rule broader than just on DC. I’m sorry that you don’t see it but rude comments like the one you spouted destroy any credibility you and your lacking opinion may have.
Amen...I think this is going to be a broad decision. They might correct Miller, and probably do away with 922(0) IMHO....Looks like we need to start looking for cases NOW IOT make a quick 922(0) ruling.
How about bombs? When did it become illegal somewhere in the USA, to have a big ol’ bomb, unless he had a license?
Of course the need for legislation in America has been an emerging need.
I’m arguing something that libertarianist folk should appreciate — that people deemed responsible (worthy of potentially serving in a militia) should be allowed to have a machine gun, grenade launcher, etc.
We have to be deemed responsible to be able to drive a car, rightly so. Surely, the same, to have a bazooka.
Driving a car, on public roads, is a privledge. NOT A RIGHT. There is no basis for comparison that may apply because you are comparing a privledge to a Right. It doesn’t work.
But for the sake of argument, let’s apply those standards. Anyone may purchase a car. There is no age limit or mental test. Felons may purchase a vehicle and own it. They may use the car as they see fit on private property without interference from the Government. Safety and emmission rules don’t apply on private property nor do age restrictions.
licensing only applies to driving on public roads and property. Is this the comparison you are promoting?
Mike
I do take exception to your broad ruling prediction; I think Roberts will attempt to achieve the strongest unanimous decision (9-0?) he can muster. Even if it focuses only a strict interpretation, we need to be cognizant that he will be shooting (pun intended) for the ages ie the next 225 yrs. That's we he doesn't want a weasley 5-4 that will be endlessly debated like RvW.
It could be as simple as sending it back to DC as unconstitutional and letting them re-try under some different standard eg public safety. Once it's established that the 2A is an individual right without limitations based on militia service, then it's merely a grind to address each & every regulation in the light of "infringement".
I suspect he might have done us a lot of favors by getting Alito and Roberts on the SC. We’ll see what June brings.
It was common for farmers to have ready access to dynamite for blowing stumps, as well as ANFO
If you shoot black powder guns, a jar of black powder poured into a pipe plus a fuse is a bomb
Hell, if you were a science or engineering major and payed attention in chem class, you can do explosives
Keep in mind that one of the biggest mass murders in NYC prior to 9/11 was accomplished with a large container of gasoline (the Happyland Nightclub arson)
More like pennies on the $100 bill.
However, I have lots of C&R guns that are somewhat better protected than Macs, sears, trigger packs, etc.
BLUF: I would rather have my collection worthless and be able to call up FN and order a P90 sent to my door.
you have a link to the poscast?
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.