[Destructor]

My God! I think I'm gonna pass out!! FReepers actually praising the Bush Administration!!! Never thought I'd see the day.

[1Old Pro]

Ted Olson & Ashcroft make me happy and proud that Bush is in the White House.

[agitator]

That right, however, is "subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse."

Hmmmmmm.

Fully automatic firearms are particularly suited to criminal misuse

Semi-automatic firearms are particularly suited to criminal misuse

Rifles are particularly suited to criminal misuse

Shotguns are particularly suited to criminal misuse

Pistols are particularly suited to criminal misuse

Revolvers are particularly suited to criminal misuse

BB guns are particularly suited to criminal misuse

Spud guns are particularly suited to criminal misuse

Slingshots are particularly suited to criminal misuse

 

Who defines who is "unfit" ? The ATF? What a load of crap.  Gun owners are so desperate that this non-statement is probably looked at as "good news." Sigh.

This is akin to a government official in 1905 saying the Indians got a raw deal. Wake me up when a single piece of federal anti-gun law goes away or isn't replaced with something worse.

[GretchenEE]

fyi

[PatrickHenry]

From the lead article:
The Supreme Court last ruled on the scope of the Second Amendment in 1939, when it said the clause protects only those rights that have "some reasonable relationship to the preservation of efficiency of a well-regulated militia."

That is a reference to United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), which can be found here: United States v. Miller.

The case is very far from being a gun control freak's license to regulate our weapons possession. The case upheld a law against individuals possessing sawed-off shotguns, but only because they were not military weapons. Among the significant things it says are these:

The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. "A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline." And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.

[Mudboy Slim]

"...official Justice Department policy through four Democratic and five Republican administrations."

WOW!! I had no idea the Executive Branch had been misinterpreting the Second Amendment that long.

SHEEEESH!! Good for the Bush Administration, though...MUD

[INSENSITIVE GUY]

This is wonderful news,BUT!The part of this that says,"certain TYPES of firearms that can be possesed"leaves the door wide open to continue the semi-auto ban and ban others as well!

[Rowdee]

Olsen and Ashcroft have stated how Ashcroft feels....and yet Olsen is telling the court not to test the principle now in the cases he wrote arguments for.

So......nothing will change, apparently....it is possible that nothing will be said, and the 'law of the land' will continue hold sway thru 4 Democratic administrations and 6 Republican administrations (adding the current Bush admin to the list of do-nothing Republican admins, after all)

[MeekOneGOP]

White House reverses [decades old] stand on right to bear arms

Excerpt:

Reversing decades of Justice Department policy, the Bush administration has told the
Supreme Court that it believes the Constitution protects an individual's right to possess firearms............

"This action is proof positive that the worst fears about Attorney-General Ashcroft have
come true: His extreme ideology on guns has now become government policy," said Michael
Barnes, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which promotes gun control.

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my ping list!. . .don't be shy.

[sneakypete]

Mr. Olson's court filing on Monday urged the Supreme Court not to get involved and acknowledged the policy change in a lengthy footnote. Mr. Olson also attached Mr. Ashcroft's letter to prosecutors.

Here is yet another example of Bubba Bush and Janet Ashcroft being too cute for words. They are trying to act like Constiutional thinkers,while at the same time telling the Supreme Court to not take a case that would overturn federal gun laws. They are terrified the whole un-Constitutional gun control house of cards will come tumbling down over their ears.

When will these idiots learn that all talking out both sides of your mouth accomplishes is getting both sides mad at you. The gun-control feaks are having fainting spells over Ashcroft's pose,while anybody oppossed to gun-control who thinks about this for a minute will realize what Ashcroft and Bubba-2 are really doing is selling us down the river.

[Wonder Warthog]

"The administration's view represents a reversal of government interpretations of the Second Amendment going back some 40 years."

Ah, for some reason, all the antigunners think that precedent somehow starts after FDR's term(s) of office, conveniently forgetting that there are almost 150 years of legal precedents IN FAVOR of an individual RKBA before that "policy" was implemented. All this is is a reversion to the ORIGINAL interpretation of the Second Amendment.

[Grampa Dave]

When do most Americans know that President Bush did the right thing.

When the left wing scumbags make statements like this: This action is proof positive that the worst fears about Attorney-General Ashcroft have come true: His extreme ideology on guns has now become government policy," said Michael Barnes, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which promotes gun control.

When the losers in political life, the third party irrelevants say Bush is still a loser! You know the professional GW haters who hate GW 30 hours a day (they work overtime hating and trying to bash him and blame him for everything that happens from the sun rising in the East and setting in the West!)

The rest of us say "Good Job Mr. President!"

You can tell the value of a man by his enemies! Again President Bush's Value comes across loud and clear except for his Axis of Whining Weasel Haters in America!

[takenoprisoner]

At the same time, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer said the case need not test that principle now.

Am I reading this right? While the Bush administration offers this position, it's not ready to defend it in the Supreme Court?

[Standing Wolf]

Shall issue needs to be
the law of the land!

[B. A. Conservative]

Thank you Mr. Bush.

That is a significant step in the "right" direction. That partially makes up for the two steps (Steel tariffs & CFR) in the wrong direction. Running the country is not like the tango, we want all steps headed on the right course. And getting along with Democrats is nuts. Defeating Democrats at every turn is the only acceptable course of action. No compromises. Shutting down most of government would be the best thing that ever happened to the country.

As for Mr. Barnes, he would have to stick a gun up his arse in order to blow his brains out.

[semaj]

"The administration's view represents a reversal of government interpretations of the Second Amendment going back some 40 years.

Left unsaid by all this is the position of the Govt. prior to 1939. Before 1939, there was over 150 years of precedence concerning the understanding of the 2nd Amendment without any question of what it meant.

[FreeTheHostages]

Sigh, I read threads like this and some times I'm worried that I'm just not conservative enough for y'all. Why do conservatives criticize Bush so much and profane exasperated surprise by the SG's position? Not you, but a lot of people in this post seem pretty ungrateful. If I were President Bush, wonder why I'd bother throwing this bone to the conservative lobby. Ah, forgive my cynicism, but it begins with the fact that the Constitution *does* say "well-regulated militia." But it does. My revolutionary ancestors in Bennington Vermont, Ethan Allen and the like, were often drunk when they fought though. So I truly wonder *how* well regulated the founders thought it had to be. I wonder if we all couldn't just compromise and agree that it has to be a militia, but it can be a few drunken scoundrels from Vermont and that's good enough. Aw, don't y'all start flaming me. This just isn't my issue and not one I feel strongly on. So sue me. But y'all be nice to President Bush. He did you all a favor here.

[RandallFlagg]

Now all we need is for them to make "Vermont-Style" concealed carry nationwide and call it an anti-terror bill.

If that happened (fat chance), Bush and the REAL Americans in office would be GUARANTEED re-election. Meantime, the gun-grabbing, socialist, have-to-be-paid-for-by-taxpayers-because-they-never-learned-to-get-a-real-job politicians would be thrown out the door.

That scenario is still a far dream, but one can still hope.

[Pharmboy]

The Bill of Rights was written by Madison after George Mason and Patrick Henry feared that the Constitution did not do enough to protect the citizen from the state. These rights are for individuals, not the state. Therefore, the White House's current interpretation is in line with the Founders.

It is also in line with FreeRepublic's opinion (the other day someone defined Freepers to a newbie: all Freepers agree on two things--1) the Clintons are as low as you can get and still be human and 2) leave my guns alone. Freepers agree on little else as a group).

[alpowolf]

At the same time, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer said the case need not test that principle now

More empty talk. Just what I'm coming to expect from this administration.