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.

Wise gun restrictions should remain in force

Josey1Josey1 Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
edited May 2002 in General Discussion
Wise gun restrictions should remain in force

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, "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," has been the cause of much debate. Some hold that the amendment guarantees an "individual's" right to bear arms, and others think it applies only to states forming "regulated militias."

Stepping now into that fray is Attorney General John Ashcroft's Justice Department. It has decided the Second Amendment, "broadly protects the rights of "individuals" to own firearms. It gave that interpretation in two briefs filed before the Supreme Court Tuesday. However, this move appears to be political grandstanding and little else. The high court hasn't spoken on the issue since 1939, and it held then that the right applies only in the formation of a well-regulated militias.

The Justice Department, isn't asking the court to rule or do anything; in fact, the Solicitor General wants the court to reject both appeals. He agrees the restrictions in both cases fit allowable federal limitations. The cases involving Second Amendment rights involve a doctor charged with a federal violation for having a gun while under a domestic violence restraining order, and a man convicted of owning two machine guns in violation of federal law.

Also looking to make political hay with the gun lobby is Georgia's own Sen. Zell Miller. He became the first Democrat to deliver a keynote speech to the NRA since 1991.

Miller is also one of the water carriers for a couple of NRA-sponsored bills. One to protect firearms manufacturers from lawsuits and the other brings into question state laws that require archiving a sample cartridge or bullet for every gun sold for use as possible evidence. The NRA thinks that is an invasion of privacy. Also, Miller supports pilots who want to be armed in the cockpit.

The NRA, Miller and Ashcroft are in danger of raising the profile of the NRA once again to a level where it could collapse under its own weight. Every gun restriction is not a violation of the Second Amendment; in fact, the amendment carries no weight in state legislatures at all. The NRA and its political chums should be careful not to harm a fine organization by making it a one-trick pony. Many of its own members agree with background checks, in stores and in gun shows.

Sensible restrictions that attempt to keep guns from the hands of children and felons are to be upheld, no matter what the Justice Department's stance. Besides, until the Supreme Court changes its tune, the department's recent assertions are just another opinion to add to the list along with Miller's.



Wise gun restrictions should remain in force

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, "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," has been the cause of much debate. Some hold that the amendment guarantees an "individual's" right to bear arms, and others think it applies only to states forming "regulated militias."

Stepping now into that fray is Attorney General John Ashcroft's Justice Department. It has decided the Second Amendment, "broadly protects the rights of "individuals" to own firearms. It gave that interpretation in two briefs filed before the Supreme Court Tuesday. However, this move appears to be political grandstanding and little else. The high court hasn't spoken on the issue since 1939, and it held then that the right applies only in the formation of a well-regulated militias.

The Justice Department, isn't asking the court to rule or do anything; in fact, the Solicitor General wants the court to reject both appeals. He agrees the restrictions in both cases fit allowable federal limitations. The cases involving Second Amendment rights involve a doctor charged with a federal violation for having a gun while under a domestic violence restraining order, and a man convicted of owning two machine guns in violation of federal law.

Also looking to make political hay with the gun lobby is Georgia's own Sen. Zell Miller. He became the first Democrat to deliver a keynote speech to the NRA since 1991.

Miller is also one of the water carriers for a couple of NRA-sponsored bills. One to protect firearms manufacturers from lawsuits and the other brings into question state laws that require archiving a sample cartridge or bullet for every gun sold for use as possible evidence. The NRA thinks that is an invasion of privacy. Also, Miller supports pilots who want to be armed in the cockpit.

The NRA, Miller and Ashcroft are in danger of raising the profile of the NRA once again to a level where it could collapse under its own weight. Every gun restriction is not a violation of the Second Amendment; in fact, the amendment carries no weight in state legislatures at all. The NRA and its political chums should be careful not to harm a fine organization by making it a one-trick pony. Many of its own members agree with background checks, in stores and in gun shows.

Sensible restrictions that attempt to keep guns from the hands of children and felons are to be upheld, no matter what the Justice Department's stance. Besides, until the Supreme Court changes its tune, the department's recent assertions are just another opinion to add to the list along with Miller's.



http://www.macon.com/mld/telegraph/3224506.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
Sign In or Register to comment.