[vannrox]

The Bias just seeps out.

[vannrox]

Bump for the BANG.

[cactusSharp]

I don't care in the Boston Globe had
a picture of Ashcroft shooting fully
rolled marijuana cigarettes up his arm
it would be a lie....The Globe lies
pure and simple.......

[KrisKrinkle]

True, the bias seeps out and they "lie" (unfortunately some of them don't understand, therefore believe it, and therefore aren't lieing, and that's worse.)

But let's look at this.

On the one hand, "That effort has thus far been frustrated, ironically, by the Justice Department, which has yet to argue in court that a prosecution should not go forward because of the Second Amendment."

On the other hand, "Whatever the practical impact of Ashcroft's declaration, there is no doubt that his view is being grasped eagerly by criminal defense lawyers."

And 'People being prosecuted for what the attorney general has deemed protected conduct have begun filing motions seeking to determine how such prosecutions can be reconciled with the stated position of the United States with regard to the Second Amendment,''

And "More than 30 such challenges have been filed in local courts in Washington. A similar flurry of Second Amendment pleas, also numbering about 30, has emerged in Richmond, Va. ..."

And 'Eighteen state attorneys general wrote to him last month to say they agreed with his assessment, maintaining that ''there is an increasing amount of data available to support the claim that private gun ownership deters crime.'''

So, when this gets to SCOTUS, it won't just be the US Attorney General presenting his position with a deluge of media bias against it. It will be whatever case, brought to SCOTUS by the defense not the prosecution, with a ground swell of support following it, and maybe the USAG trying to argue in favor of what ever law is in question but against his own stated position.

Maybe it's wishful thinking, but I have the sense that that would be to our advantage.

[snooker]

Liberals can read? News to me. I just assumed they were all ignorant and listened to NPR for their daily dose.

snooker

[glc1173@aol.com]

Do what the commies tried when they attempted to (their word) "overwhelm" the gun industry with litigation.

Any lawyer representing a client charged with a weapon offense should make a Second Amendment argument for its dismissal; that doesn't prevent him from making other defenses. Any lawyer who refuses to thus "zealously represent" his client is guilty of malpractice under bar rules! Do this at the start of any trial in the same way you'd argue for dismissal of a case on any other ground that its facts didn't meet essential elements.

Tie the courts up with such cases. After all, the Attorney General has gone on record stating that this is a valid defense.

Scandals of antigun politicians - from Kalifornia to Manhattan!

[GOV'T MULE]

Most courts, believing that the Supreme Court had settled the Second Amendment question in favor of the traditional view, have routinely rejected attempts to reopen it.

Whose tradition, I wonder.

[2nd_Amendment_Defender]

Police in Washington, D.C., arrested Pearson early one morning last June as he was carrying a 9mm pistol. Police said he was high on the drug PCP. His gun is licensed in neighboring Maryland, but not in Washington, so he faces a charge of violating a District of Columbia gun-control law that is one of the nation's strictest.

I am not much on a druggy carrying a firearm, but the communist gun control laws of District of Columbia have got to be repealed. Almost no good citizen that lives in the District of Columbia has a right to bear arms.

This substance abuser can be put up on other charges that will put him away.

In Utah if you have a concealed carry permit and are drunk and in possession of a firearm you can get into big trouble.

[bloodmeridian]

''This would threaten virtually every state and federal law regulating the ownership and use of firearms,'' said Attorney General Joseph T. Curran Jr. of Maryland, who like many legal scholars has urged Ashcroft to reconsider.

Gee, Joe. Why's that a problem?

''The attorney general acted without regard to existing laws and without any warning,'' Curran said in an interview. ''It's awkward, and it sends the wrong message.''

Um, if those laws are unconstitutional, then why is it sending the wrong message?