In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Justice Dept. complicates gun control
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Justice Dept. complicates gun control
May 13, 2002
The gun lobby and firearm owners were no doubt pleased last week when the administration of President George W. Bush -- through Attorney General John Ashcroft -- changed the government's 40-year-old view of the Second Amendment. And the worst fears of gun control advocates were realized.
A Justice Department brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court has no immediate impact, but could, in the right case, undermine the ability of local governments to enact strict gun control ordinances as public safety measures.
The brief, filed last week, asserts that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution "broadly protects the rights of individuals" to possess firearms. The brief contradicted the Justice Department's position since the 1960s that the Second Amendment confers only a collective right to bear arms in the context of a state-sponsored militia.
In adopting this new position, the Justice Department rejected the views of 11 of the 12 federal Appeals Courts in favor of an opinion from the 5th Circuit. That decision came in a case involving a Texas man indicted for possession of a pistol while under a domestic violence restraining order. In filing its brief, the Justice Department urged that the appeal of the indictment be rejected, indicating a view that the individual right to bear arms can be limited in some circumstances.
But this new, broader interpretation of the Second Amendment echoes the "gun rights" views of the National Rifle Association and Ashcroft, as explained in a letter to the NRA a year ago.
Some of Ashcroft's federal prosecutors may find it hampers their ability to go after gun violators, because it ignores a mountain of legal precedent. But the Attorney General is in a position to attempt to impose his views on the rest of the country, and he will clearly not shy away from doing so on guns.
http://www.freep.com/voices/editorials/eguns13_20020513.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
May 13, 2002
The gun lobby and firearm owners were no doubt pleased last week when the administration of President George W. Bush -- through Attorney General John Ashcroft -- changed the government's 40-year-old view of the Second Amendment. And the worst fears of gun control advocates were realized.
A Justice Department brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court has no immediate impact, but could, in the right case, undermine the ability of local governments to enact strict gun control ordinances as public safety measures.
The brief, filed last week, asserts that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution "broadly protects the rights of individuals" to possess firearms. The brief contradicted the Justice Department's position since the 1960s that the Second Amendment confers only a collective right to bear arms in the context of a state-sponsored militia.
In adopting this new position, the Justice Department rejected the views of 11 of the 12 federal Appeals Courts in favor of an opinion from the 5th Circuit. That decision came in a case involving a Texas man indicted for possession of a pistol while under a domestic violence restraining order. In filing its brief, the Justice Department urged that the appeal of the indictment be rejected, indicating a view that the individual right to bear arms can be limited in some circumstances.
But this new, broader interpretation of the Second Amendment echoes the "gun rights" views of the National Rifle Association and Ashcroft, as explained in a letter to the NRA a year ago.
Some of Ashcroft's federal prosecutors may find it hampers their ability to go after gun violators, because it ignores a mountain of legal precedent. But the Attorney General is in a position to attempt to impose his views on the rest of the country, and he will clearly not shy away from doing so on guns.
http://www.freep.com/voices/editorials/eguns13_20020513.htm
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878