Not only that it sets precedent that both parties agree the right to keep and bare arms can indeed be infringed upon. This policy is closer to what the Dems were pushing 15-20 years ago than any conservative position on the Second Ammendment. We've lowered our standards to theirs it seems. Slowly but surely the two parties are catching up with each other.
Not so fast: "...to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse."
That allows for a continuation of Brady and NFA. Ashcroft is close, but still not a 2nd Amendment absolutist.
Exactly. Far from being an extremist position, Ashcroft's is quite moderate. He clearly sees a legitimate role for federal regulation of firearms.
In fact, everything the gun-grabbers say they want can be done under Ashcroft's interpretation of the 2nd.
So if you see any gun-grabbers complaining about this interpretation, it can only be because it would not allow the things that they won't openly say that they want.
Something Gary Kleck once wrote is apropos:
It is ironic ... in light of all the impassioned scholarly dispute, that large defensive gun use estimates pose no threat whatsoever to the moderate gun controls, such as background checks of prospective gun buyers, that most Americans support. These measures would not deny guns to any significant number of noncriminals, and thus would not prevent defensive gun use among the law-abiding. People who sincerely support only moderate controls, but oppose gun prohibition, should have no political concerns about large defensive use estimates.
Such estimates do, on the other hand, constitute a very serious obstacle to promoting gun prohibition, which would deny guns to criminals and noncriminals alike, and thus would reduce whatever benefits defensive gun use may yield. Therefore, in light of the absence of any intellectually serious basis for discounting large defensive gun use estimates, one plausible explanation of why some scholars cling to the rare-defensive gun use theory in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence is that they favor a disarmed populace and accurately perceive high defensive gun use estimates as a significant political obstacle to achieving national gun prohibition.
- Gary Kleck, "Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control.