Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Second Amendment Doesn't Mean What it Says (Mass ACLU Barf-a-rama)
Massachusetts ACLU Loonies ^ | Mass ACLU

Posted on 02/19/2003 2:17:30 PM PST by Skooz

2nd Amendment

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

Have you ever heard someone say gun control is a fine idea— except that the Second Amendment prohibits it?

It’s a popular sentiment. Fortunately, it’s not true.

The Second Amendment was never intended as a gun license for the entire American populace. As originally drafted—and as consistently interpreted by the courts for more than a century—the Amendment does not grant any blanket right to own a gun nor does it stand in the way of rational, effective gun control.

The idea of gun ownership as an American birthright is nothing more than a popular myth. Yet the controversy over gun control and the Second Amendment rages on.

As the nation’s oldest and most prominent defender of individual rights, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) holds the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights in the highest regard. To clear up many misconceptions, what follows are some basic questions and answers about the Second Amendment and gun control.

Q The Second Amendment says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Doesn’t it mean just that?

A There is more to the Second Amendment than just the last 14 words. Most of the debate on the Amendment has focused on its final phrase and entirely ignores the first phrase: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State . . ." And to dissect the Amendment is to destroy its context. While some scholars have suggested that the Amendment gives individuals the constitutional right to bear arms, still others have argued for discarding the Amendment as irrelevant and out of date. However, the vast majority of constitutional experts agree that the right to keep and bear arms was intended to apply only to members of state-run, citizen militias.

Q If it doesn’t guarantee the right to own a gun, why was the Second Amendment included in the Bill of Rights?

A When James Madison  proposed the Bill of Rights in the late 1780s, people were still suspicious of any centralized federal government. Just 10 years earlier, the British army been an occupying force in Colonial America—enforcing arbitrary laws decreed from afar. After the Revolutionary War, the states insisted on the constitutional right to defend themselves in case the fledgling U.S. government became tyrannical like the British Crown. The states demanded the right to keep an armed "militia" a form of insurance.

Q What exactly is "a well regulated militia?"

A Militias in 1792 consisted of part-time citizen-soldiers organized by individual states. Its members were civilians who kept arms, ammunition and other military equipment in their houses and barns—there was no other way to muster a militia with sufficient speed. Over time, however, the state militias failed to develop as originally anticipated. States found it difficult to organize and finance their militias and, by the mid-1800s, they had effectively ceased to exist. Beginning in 1903, Congress began to pass legislation that would eventually transform state militias into what is now the National Guard. Today, the National Guard—and Army Reserve—are scarcely recognizable as descendants of militias of the 1790s. The National Guard and Reserve forces, in fact, do not permit personnel to store military weapons at home. And many of today’s weapons—tanks, armored personnel carriers, airplanes and the like—hardly lend themselves to use by individuals.

Q Does the Second Amendment in any way guarantee gun rights to individuals?

A No. The weight of historical and legal scholarship clearly shows that the Second Amendment was intended to guarantee that states could maintain armed forces to resist the federal government. Most scholars overwhelmingly concur that the Second Amendment was never intended to guarantee gun ownership rights for individual personal use. Small arms ownership was common when the Bill of Rights was adopted, with many people owning single-shot firearms for hunting in what was then an overwhelmingly rural nation.

Q Does the Second Amendment authorize Americans to possess and own any firearms they feel they may need?

A Clearly, no. The original intent of the Second Amendment was to protect the right of states to maintain state militias. Private gun ownership that is not necessary to the maintenance of militia is not protected by the Second Amendment.

Q Does the Second Amendment allow government to limit—even prohibit—ownership of guns by individuals?

A Yes. Federal, state and local governments can all regulate guns without violating the Second Amendment. State authorities have considerable powers to regulate guns. The federal government can also regulate firearm ownership, although some scholars believe that the federal power may not be as extensive as that of an individual state. California, for example, has limited the ability of local governments to regulate firearms. While the state has kept its broad regulatory power, cities and counties can only prohibit guns from being carried in public places.

Q How have the courts—particularly the U.S. Supreme Court—interpreted the Second Amendment?

A The Supreme Court has flatly held that the individual’s right to keep and bear arms "is not a right granted by the Constitution." In the four cases in which the high court has addressed the issue, it has consistently held that the Second Amendment does not confer a blanket right of individual gun ownership. The most important Supreme Court Second Amendment case, U.S. v. Miller, was decided in 1939. It involved two men who illegally shipped a sawed-off shotgun from Oklahoma to Arkansas, then claimed the Second Amendment prohibited the federal government from prosecuting them. The court emphatically disagreed, ruling that the Second Amendment had the "obvious purpose" of creating state militias, not of authorizing individual gun ownership. In two earlier rulings in 1876 and 1886, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment affected only the federal government’s power to regulate gun ownership and had no effect on state gun control powers. Those cases, Presser v. U.S. and U.S. v. Cruikshank, formed the basis for the continuing legal decisions that the Second Amendment is not an impediment to rational gun control. In another case that the Supreme Court declined to review, a federal appeals court in Illinois ruled in 1983 that the Second Amendment could not prevent a municipal government from banning handgun possession. In the case, Quilici v. Village of Morton Grove, the appeals court held that contemporary handguns couldn’t be considered as weapons relevant to a collective militia.

Q The National Rifle Association (NRA) says the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear arms. Has the NRA got it wrong?

A Like any powerful special interest, the NRA works to secure its financial well being. It insists on a view of the Second Amendment that defies virtually all court decisions and contradicts findings of most legal scholars. In so doing, the NRA actively perpetuates a seemingly endless cycle of gun-related fatalities. The NRA intimidates politicians because it is very well financed and, like any wealthy single-issue special interest, can muster considerable pressure and scare tactics against legislators who oppose it. For decades, the NRA has effectively promulgated its message. Other voices have recently begun to be heard, however, including the public health community, civil rights and civil liberties organizations and groups committed to women’s, children’s and family rights. The NRA implies that the Bill of Rights forces us to accept unlimited gun ownership and tolerate the human tragedies that guns cause in our society. That simply isn’t true.

Q What are the Second Amendment positions of the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Massachusetts?

A For decades, both the national ACLU and its  Massachsetts affiliates have agreed the Second Amendment guarantees only the rights of states to maintain militias. The national ACLU has urged caution over gun control laws that, though well intended, might infringe on other civil liberties. The ACLU of Massachusetts believes effective gun control—especially of handguns and assault weapons—is essential to curbing the escalating violence in our society


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Miscellaneous; US: Massachusetts; Unclassified
KEYWORDS: aclu; banglist; communists; guncontrol; gunhaters; secondamendment
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-123 next last
To: RonF
The only groups that are pushing for a Second Amendment ruling are the anti-gun leftists, the lawyers and the Civil War II wannabes.

It interesting that so many groups are pushing it now that the odds can go against us. I believe they are pushing for it now before the Bush administration can confirm any judges to replace the leftists on the Court.
41 posted on 02/19/2003 3:03:03 PM PST by Shooter 2.5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
What everyone has missed is the linguistic argument. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." You can only "infringe" on something that already exists. This clearly means that a pre-existing right to keep and bear arms PRECEEDED the constitution and the Bill of Rights. Therefore, it could not apply merely to militias.
42 posted on 02/19/2003 3:03:08 PM PST by foghornleghorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
Reading this got me so mad I think I'm going to the range and shoot my SKS, and enjoy that God given right that good men died for.
43 posted on 02/19/2003 3:07:58 PM PST by broadsword (Those who beat there swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
That's not what I read.

A FIVE-MINUTE HANDBOOK

FOR GUN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS

Copyright © 2000 by JASPAR@aol.com

All rights reserved. Reproduction or distribution

is permitted so long as this copyright notice is

attached; the complete Handbook (including the

introduction) is reproduced; no word or words

are altered in any way whatsoever, and the web site

address ---http://www.jaspar.net--- is attached.

Thank you!

INTRODUCTION

I've been a gun rights activist for nearly 10 years.

I wasted a lot of time for the first 5 years because no one gave me the rule book you are now reading.

Maybe that's because no one had written it. This is the stuff I wish I had known starting on day one.

If you've just arrived at this party, the next 5 minutes you spend reading this might save you 5 years of otherwise wasted time and energy.

If you've been in the gun rights game for a while, this handbook will be the fastest refresher course you've ever taken.

This past year I've received a lot of mail from jittery gun owners who are finally waking up to what's happening to our right to keep and bear arms (RKBA).

This handbook is mostly for them.

If the rules I list below scare off a few folks, so be it. I want to tell it like it really is -- to give a quick snapshot of the tips, tricks and tactics that actually work in RKBA activism.

The bad news is that this is not a complete list of the rules.

The good news is that there will never be a complete list of rules.

The rules listed below are based on my own experience from working thousands of hours with down and dirty RKBA activist pros. I am deeply grateful to all of them. They know who they are.

Some of these rules have been followed for so long by old-time activists that they have forgotten what the original rules were.

It's time to list them again.

And sneak in a couple of new ones.

So read them and weep, or read them and rejoice.

THE HANDBOOK RULES

NO ONE IS AS INTERESTED AS YOU ARE. Nowadays everyone's attention span and time are limited. Be grateful if you get anyone's attention on our issue, even for a few seconds. Some wannabe activists come in like a lion, then disappear faster than sh*t through a short dog. Take whatever you get from any volunteer. Praise and thank them. Don't be disappointed when they drift away. They will. But some come back. Keep the light on for them.

THE NRA STINKS. So does GOA, SAF, JPFO, and any or all of the rest of the gun rights organizations. At the same time, all of these organizations are the best thing since sliced bread. We won't keep our rights without them. It's normal to love them and hate them at the same time. Be sure your complaints about them go to the person who can do something about your problem. Never give up your membership -- it's much easier to fix things from the inside. Avoid griping in public -- our opponents love it when we do. Always handle our dirty laundry behind closed doors. Always.

THERE IS NO MAGIC BULLET. There is no single answer, rule, or solution. Never has been, and never will be. None of us will write the single brilliant letter to the editor or internet message that will miraculously turn everything around. Keep steadily busy. Do as much as you can, whenever you can. Anything you do counts, but some things count more than others. Find out what counts. Then do it.

THERE IS NO FINAL VICTORY. Preserving RKBA is an ongoing PROCESS. We are winning and losing battles during this process, but the war will never be over. Becoming active to keep your gun rights is a lot like cleaning your house: it's thankless and boring work, but necessary. Like dirt, the antigun crowd will just keep coming back. Forever. Your activism will keep us winning more than losing. Our opponents count on wearing us down. They love it when one of us (not you, of course) gets discouraged and drops out. When you fully understand and accept the reality that RKBA is a never-ending struggle, you're automatically in the top 5 percent of all RKBA defenders. Congratulations.

RKBA ACTIVISM IS BORING. It's especially boring when you are doing things that really make a difference. Most of us want drama. We want to be entertained. Phone bank calling, precinct walking, going to RKBA grassroots seminars -- suddenly, even a trip to the dentist for a root canal will start to look better. Sorry, but there is no workaround on this aspect. Freedom is not free. It's a pain in the ass. Get used to it, get over it, and get to work.

USE THE POWER OF FEAR AND GUILT. Gun owners are susceptible to these emotions. Awaken sleeping RKBA activists by tapping these powerful emotions. Fear and guilt will move mountains -- and fill the collection plate, and recruit new members. If gun owners won't become active for themselves, ask them to do it for their families. For their children. For their country. And -- this tactic works! -- ask them to do it for YOU.

WATCH OUT FOR MISDIRECTED, TIME-WASTING EFFORTS. E-mail to elected people is pretty much worthless -- unless the official already personally knows you. Internet polls are useless. Online polls make some folks think they are actually doing something. They are not. It's a false sense of accomplishment. It's like bringing a doctor to a dead man. Focus on the stuff that works. If you're going to hunt ducks, go where the ducks are.

POLITICIANS ONLY CARE ABOUT VOTES AND MONEY. In-person visits, phone calls, and snail-mailed, handwritten letters to elected folks help -- because politicians know that if you take this much trouble, you and your family and friends will also vote.

HOT TIP: Make yourself known to politicians for issues other than gun rights. Don't present yourself as a single-issue person. Praise and help politicians on THEIR pet projects. Then, when a new gun control law comes up, your opinion will seem especially credible. Otherwise, you will soon be stereotyped and discounted as a single-issue voter.

ANOTHER HOT TIP: Politicians have to explain why they vote Yes or No on proposed laws. Sometimes they really need your help in composing explanations to their constituents. If you want your elected official to vote No on a seemingly popular new gun control law, she might be more willing to vote your way if you give her a "back door" -- a good, common sense explanation that she can give to all of her constituents.

GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN OFFICE IN THE FIRST PLACE. If we have the right people in power, antigun laws will not be passed. Period. The laws are what matter. This concept is so simple that many folks can't see it, just like they can't "see" the air they breathe. The anti-rights crowd can hold all the gun control seminars and news conferences they want, but nothing will happen unless they can pass more laws. This fact tells you about the how, what, where, when, why, and with whom you should be spending your time, energy, and money. Politicians pass laws. Therefore, you must get involved in politics to protect your gun rights. There is just no way to get around this. Sorry. I don't like politics either. Bummer!

STOP THE SABER RATTLING -- NOW! Avoid those shrill folks who sound threatening or talk about doomsday. It's a waste of your time. These noisy folks remind me of a couple in a failing marriage who only talk about a getting a divorce instead of talking about their real problems. If they don't solve their problems, separation or divorce becomes the inevitable outcome. Some people get pumped up on silly fantasy scenarios. I do not.

ARM YOURSELF WITH ACCURATE INFORMATION. Paradoxically, bad information or disinformation is a plague in the so-called Information Age. When you write or talk about firearms issues, use only the facts, the truth, and the provable. Verify any quotes that you use. Back up your generalizations with powerful and specific examples. Get on the internet, and get your like-minded friends online. Join several of the hundreds of net communities that will keep you informed instantly and completely about our special issues. Information is power!

IGNORE MEDIA SPIN AND THE NEWS WAVES. It's far too easy to go bonkers reacting to the latest media-driven crisis. Don't let the media push your buttons. The RKBA grassroots pros I know do not overreact to crises. In fact, most of the ultra-pros that I know do not react at all to media hysteria. Bashing the media about their bias is not productive. Some gun owners use media bias as an excuse to do nothing -- because the situation seems so overwhelming and hopeless. Truth is, if you are a busy activist -- already steadily doing stuff that matters -- you will find the media reacting to YOU. Be friendly and polite with them -- not hostile. Become a reliable source of information for them. And just keep on being ACTIVE.

JUST SHOW UP. It's been said that 80 percent of success is showing up. Being there. Showing up to vote. Showing up at an RKBA seminar. At your assemblyman's office. At a city council meeting. My father's favorite motto: "Your actions speak so loud that I can't hear a word you're saying." Your "silent" activism can be a model for others. What will your 3 hunting buddies think when they find out you spent an afternoon handing out brochures door-to-door for a pro-gun politician?

DON'T MESS WITH TRUE BELIEVERS. In the time you spend trying to convert one hard core antigun person to our side, you could have gone out and motivated and organized 20 people who already think like you do. Go with the flow. It's easier on your nerves, and much more effective. Personally, I have converted several anti-rights true believers, but never again! Lots of NRA members are not registered voters. A lot of gun owners aren't NRA members. Even more folks have no idea of their elected officials' positions on gun issues. Where is your time most effectively spent? Think about this before you spend an hour writing a clever response to a silly message you found somewhere on the internet.

SIMPLICITY STILL MATTERS. The old rule, Keep It Super Simple (KISS), is as important as it ever was. It applies to internet postings, planning, speeches -- everything. And keep it short. And keep it sweet: don't ever ridicule or insult anyone. Did you notice that I did NOT say, "Keep It Simple, STUPID?"

YOU ARE ALL ALONE. Well, not quite alone. You do have some help. The NRA has a staff of several hundred. There is no way humanly possible that "the NRA" can put out all the brush fires started by the anti-rights crowd. Pro-gun national organizations give direction and information -- but they cannot save your rights. Only YOU can save YOUR rights. You are 100 percent responsible. When you fully accept this reality, you are automatically in the top one percent of all RKBA activists.

THE HIDDEN BONUS OF GUN RIGHTS ACTIVISM. The more involved you get with firearms freedom, the more you will realize that your single issue actually complements and protects other human rights issues. Personally, I am deeply offended by many aspects of today's culture. When I focus my activism on RKBA, I can often sense I am making a measurable difference. All rights -- like all humans -- are connected.

WHEN IN DOUBT, JUST DO SOMETHING. Sometimes we don't know what will work. Sometimes the rule is that there are no rules. I once wrote an essay I thought was mediocre at best. Five years later, I'm still receiving mail about it. Don't hesitate to try something new and innovative -- get it out on the table! Often your finest essay or brilliant letter will not be acknowledged, or you will just get a form letter response. But that letter to the editor that you dashed off in a few minutes appears in tomorrow's newspaper! Go figure. Better yet, try not to figure. Trust yourself, trust your instincts -- and just do something.

I'll see you in the trenches.

44 posted on 02/19/2003 3:08:14 PM PST by Shooter 2.5 (Don't punch holes in the lifeboat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Sloth
"After the Revolutionary War, the states insisted on the constitutional right to defend themselves in case the fledgling U.S. government became tyrannical like the British Crown. The states demanded the right to keep an armed "militia" a form of insurance."

Yeah. So that's why most state Consitutions specifically enumerate the right of individuals to keep and bear arms.

45 posted on 02/19/2003 3:08:24 PM PST by groanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
In law school professors try and take this tack. Remember these people and the ACLU lawyers are refugees from the real world.

We need some leftist (don't laugh) law journals to publish real information about the second ammendment.

This is just a situation of keep repeating a bunch of lies and see what sticks.
46 posted on 02/19/2003 3:09:48 PM PST by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
"The problem is, the lefties just don't care that their arguments don't make sense."

They don't care at all if they lie either. They've mastered the fine art of the con, and the forked tongue is just one of their more often used tools.

47 posted on 02/19/2003 3:12:23 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
"Which is rather bizarre, considering that the 2nd A is surrounded by amendments that infer INDIVIDUAL rights. So we have the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th which deal with individual rights, the rights of states are not mentioned until the 10th, but the 2nd somehow sticks out like a sore thumb among all those other individual rights? And, even if we take the arguments of the ACLU, that the National Guard took the place of state militias, the feds have basically federalized the National Guard, so it no longer serves the role the ACLU is claiming for it.

This is just so easy to demolish. The problem is, the lefties just don't care that their arguments don't make sense."



The serious problem with you statement is that it makes sense. Commons sense and logic are just not acceptable to leftist objectives. After all people can't kill without guns. If we just outlawed guns then all crime would end. If we just outlawed evil thoughts algore could win and election.
48 posted on 02/19/2003 3:12:57 PM PST by longtermmemmory
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
Actually, I first heard that story in the context of the 1916 Irish Rebellion (the son was an IRA sympathizer and the garden-diggers were British troops), so maybe it's more of "Hibernian ingenuity"!
49 posted on 02/19/2003 3:13:36 PM PST by MikalM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: All
Check it out:

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?SearchID=73126532094039&Avis=TO&Dato=20030214&Kategori=NEWS09&Lopenr=102140084&Ref=AR
50 posted on 02/19/2003 3:14:30 PM PST by groanup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
A There is more to the Second Amendment than just the last 14 words. Most of the debate on the Amendment has focused on its final phrase and entirely ignores the first phrase:

1) The first clause is the SUBORDINATE clause in the sentence

2) Well-regulated in 1700's english vernacular meant well-functioning.

51 posted on 02/19/2003 3:16:28 PM PST by Centurion2000 (Take charge of your destiny, or someone else will)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cruiserman
"I'm surprised the ACLU are willing to discount the teeth in their precious BOR."
The only thing the ACLU cares about is the portions of the BOR that further their loony left agenda. They conveniently ignore the rest.
52 posted on 02/19/2003 3:20:46 PM PST by wjcsux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RonF
Thus, for example, the First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law ...", not "Congress and the several States shall make no law ...". It states the rights preserved under it from the viewpoint of what Congress is forbidden to do.

I would tend to disagree, as the First is the only one to put a specific restraint on Congress, wheras the Fourth, for example, does not mention at which level the prohibitions apply.

53 posted on 02/19/2003 3:26:14 PM PST by dirtboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
Q. If the framers of the Constitution intended for the 2nd amendment to only apply to the state militia, why didnt they say .....the right of the "militia" to keep and bear.....

A. Poor word choice.
54 posted on 02/19/2003 3:26:15 PM PST by TomS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
There is only one way to solve this problem, take a case before the Supreme Court. Make them finally decide the issue. Do all of the vivisection of this Amendment in front of the highest court in this land. You'll notice that the left fears this most of all. They know the outcome.

I have news for the ACLU! Without the second you would have no first, or third, or fourth, or fifth, or sixth, etc., etc. The right to bear arms is sacred, a right that government shall not infringe on. That's the Consitiution, and that's the law. Read 'em and weep, leftie skum!

The Supreme Court could, with one decision, wipe out 20,000 gun "laws". Stoke of the pen, law of the land. Ha! Gotcha Billy Boy!

55 posted on 02/19/2003 3:28:17 PM PST by timydnuc (FR)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
The American Clymers and Lunatics Ululating web site referenced above lists more than 10 amendments for the Bill of Rights. I must have neen asleep when the change took place.

Also, their version of the 10th Amendment is different from what I remember:

"Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States shall not be construed to extend any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign States."

They combined the 10th and 11th Amendments. Again, I must have been asleep when that change took place.


56 posted on 02/19/2003 3:29:21 PM PST by Palpyongnanda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: foghornleghorn
This is what happens when people are educated in government indoctrination camps. (publik skules)
57 posted on 02/19/2003 3:30:09 PM PST by jcparks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: timydnuc
Ya know, why don't these commie ba$tard$ come and try to take our guns personally instead of wasting time and money.

A few less commie ba$tard$ will be a good thing.
58 posted on 02/19/2003 3:31:10 PM PST by Stopislamnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
The notion that a group of people who had just rebelled from the tyranny of a state would restrict the right to bear arms to those under state control is too stupid for words.
59 posted on 02/19/2003 3:31:37 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Constitutional Patriot
The idea that the ACLU is the last word in Constitutional scholarship is nothing more than a popular myth. "
60 posted on 02/19/2003 3:37:08 PM PST by 45Auto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-123 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson