[Joe Brower]

I, for one, am sick and tired of the seemingly endless debate on a topic that would not even be an issue in a rational and honest society. The fact that the term of art, "the people", coult be falsely construed to mean anything other than each individual citizen as it does in the rest of the Bill of Rights is a sad testament to the intellectual dishonesty of our day.

So now the Supreme Court has a chance to display either it's trademark cowardice on this issue, or exhibit some newfound courage in taking these two opposing rulings, one from the 5th and now one from the 9th, and make their own determination. It's long past overdue.

[tet68]

Now is the time for us to consider our actions should the
Supreme Court side with the Ninth Circuit.
What alternatives do we have? Civil disobedience/protest?
Appeals, and to whom?

Am off to work, will check in later this eve.

[harpseal]

I for one hope the Supreme Court does take a case on the Second and resolve the issue one way or the other. They should realize that they must decide for the individual right or for a civil war there is no middle ground.

Stay well - Stay safe - Stay armed - Yorktown

[RollingThunder]

Unfortunately, This ruling does not suprise me by the 9th Circuit Court. About the only thing in our favor, is that it is also the most overturned Circuit Court in the nation.

And we see that our old friend Judge Stephen Reinhardt, again shows his socialist colors. And remember, his wife is the Southern California ACLU Head, so you could actually see something like this comming.

[Basil Duke]

It will never end. The gun grabbers will keep at it until they regulate firearms out of existence. With most young people educated in an increasingly illiberal public school system that preaches the victim disarmament sermon ad nauseum, and the inevitable dying off of the older folks who support gun ownership, it's only a matter of time before a sizeable enough group of the public comes to believe the Sarah Brady/Chuck Schumer line. It may take another hundred years, but this scum is persistent. They know they can rely on the schools, the media, and much of the judiciary to push the agenda.

[Ancesthntr]

I'm not so sure that it is necessary to raise the issue of conflict between the 5th and 9th Circuits in order to get this case heard by the Supremes. The losing parties could simply appeal, based upon the fact that their 2nd Amendment rights have been violated. It only buttresses their argument to state that the extraordinarily well-researched and well-reasoned dicta of the Emerson case backs an individual right.

[vannrox]

The Preamble to the Bill of Rights

---

[This is a note to me from Dr. Linda Thompson of the American Justice Federation that I am passing along to everyone...email me with your comments ken]

[to ken]
You left off the MOST IMPORTANT PART of the Bill of Rights -- the PREAMBLE which tells SPECIFICALLY that the Bill of Rights was to make sure the government knew it was limited to the powers stated in the Constitution and if it didn't, the amendments were rights of the people the government couldn't screw with.
Our revisionist historians ALWAYS leave this off the Constitution!!!
Here's a copy!!!

---

Effective December 15, 1791
Articles in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.

PREAMBLE
The conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.

---

The first ten amendments are "declaratory and restrictive clauses". This means they supersede all other parts of our Constitution and restrict the powers of our Constitution.

There are people in this country that do not want you to know that these two sentences ever existed. For many years these words were "omitted" from copies of our Constitution. Public and private colleges alike have based their whole interpretation of our Constitution on the fraudulent version of this text. Those corrupt individuals have claimed that the amendments can be changed by the will of the people. By this line of reasoning the amendments are open to interpretation. This is a clever deception. The Bill of Rights is separate from the other amendments. The Bill of Rights is a declaration of restrictions to the powers of our Constitution. The Bill of Rights restricts the Constitution. The Constitution restricts the powers of government. The deception is that the government can interpret the all of the amendments and the Constitution itself. Without the presence of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights this may be a valid argument.

End the deception.

Return to Know Your Rights
http://www.harbornet.com/rights/lindat.html

[45Auto]

This issue is now "ripe" as the lawyers say for an SC review. It is perhaps "over-ripe" since the last decision was Miller, that misconstrued piece of work. Of course, anyone with a modicum of common sense and a reasonable familiarity with the English language could read and understand Miller. I assume Reinhardt has both qualities, and therefore, I think he simply made up a nice bunch of lies for his commie friends. He should be impeached. I doubt if there are enough Congressmen with the balls to do the right thing, however. A rebuke (yet another one) by the Supreme Court would be nice.

I wonder if the plaintiffs will ask for an en banc hearing? That would be one way for the 9th Circuit to sort of "cover its collective a**" by affirming the Cal AW ban and yet removing Reinhardt's flawed (perhaps criminally inspired) analysis.

I would rather see this go to the Supremes and take our chances that they will render another famous 5/4 split n favor of the individual RKBA.

Another question that arises is IF the US SC found for the individual RKBA,then what impact if any, might that have on the Cal AW ban? The ban is totally unconstitutional, yet the damn courts seem hell-bent to keep it in force.