Replies

Right on about the anti-gun bias. But to me what's really insulting is that they will look you right in the eye and declare that it is a "balanced" story; which to me is a gross insult to my intelligence.

but scholars and gun-control advocates said they were alarmed because they believe the "radical" shift in position threatens to undermine a wide range of gun laws already on the books

Unfortunately I don't think they have that much to worry about. The GOP is too chicken to offer anything more than lip service. Note this statement quoted in today's Washington Times:

"I don't think anybody in the House is looking for an opportunity to fight about guns," said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, Texas Republican. "Were it at all possible to ignore it [the McCain-Lieberman gun show bill], we will. Otherwise we'll just have to fight it out in conference."

In other words, God forbid they should have to stand on principle.

Well, it looks like government and the constitution are at odds. Which one do we acknowledge? The Document that guarantees our rights given to us by God, or the pack of jackals who live off of the rest of us like parasites, who continue to undermine our freedoms in the name of safety and security? Which would you choose? Constitution. Just like the bible, it should be enough for any person in our country.

All good points, that is why, that we, as gun owners, and people who wish to preserve the right to keep and bear arms must reach out and introduce people to the shooting sports. A right not exercised is a right lost.

Invite friends and their friends, especially if they work for the media, to go to the range with you. Explain and teach them safe gun handling, and gun marksmanship. Explain to them the beginnings of the Jim Crow/gun control laws. But give them enough time to digest it, and make it fun and enjoyable.

Then, when these journalists are tasked to write a gun-related article, they are not directly quoting the exaggerations that VPC/Brady puts out.

Actually, I think this declaration by the Justice Department is more anti-second amendment than it is pro. While on its face it appears to support the right to keep and bear arms, in reality it seeks to maintain the status quo.

By requesting that the SCOTUS deny review of these cases, the government can maintain its grip on gun control by relying on existing case law, most of which is based on the "collective rights" theory. For a real eye opener, take a look at the 11th Circuit appeal in the case of Haney v. United States. If the SCOTUS were to rule in Haney's favor, the government would view this as having let the genie out of the proverbial bottle.