Re: Licensing and Registration....NEVER!!!
- From: ozarkheart@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 00:19:17 GMT
On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 15:24:51 -0700 (PDT), Matt <matttelles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
On Jul 6, 3:10 pm, Bill Smith <squand...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 12:38:17 -0700 (PDT), bigdog
SCOTUS has affirmed that 2A is a guarantee that citizens have an
INDIVIDUAL right to keep and bear arms. That has taken prohibition off
the table. The DC gun ban has had a stake driven through its heart and
we have the hope and expectation that similar laws, particularly those
in Chicago and its suburbs, will meet a similar fate. Defacto bans in
NYC should also go by the wayside as will the ban in government
housing in San Francisco. I want to hear the lib lawyers argue that
residents of government housing don't have the same RKBA as other law
SCOTUS did not directly address the issue of licensing and
registration although did hint that such laws might be constitutional
under 2A. Whether they are constitutional or not does not make them
good policy. Would any of you find it acceptable if you had to get or
government license before you excercised your right to free speech.
Would newspapers stand still for a requirement that they be licensed.
Would anyone be comfortable with being required to register their
religous affilitiation with the government. Gee, what could go wrong
We must not leave it to the courts to decide whether licensing and
regisitration of firearms is constitutional or not. We must fight this
fight at the legislative level. We must not allow such laws to be
passed in the first place and where they are already in place, we must
work hard to get them repealed so that all Americans fully enjoy RKBA
without having their firearm freedom parceled out at the discretion of
government officials, many of whom have a decided anti-gun bias.
The gun banners have been in full retreat for over a decade. The
assault weapons ban was one of the major reasons the Dems lost control
of the Congress in 1994. Sucking up to the anti-gun lobby cost them
the White House in both 2000 and 2004. In 2006, they regained control
of Congress largely by running pro-gun rights candidates in swing
states and districts. They know that opposing those of us who cherish
firearm freedom will require them to pay a heavy political price. We
must make sure they don't forget.
The fact that notorious gun banners like Barack Obama and Hillary
Clinton even paid lip service to the Second Amendment speaks volumes.
The anti-gun lobby is on the defensive. We must keep it that way. We
cannot be satisfied with the victory we won in SCOTUS. Now is not the
time to hold our position. Now is the time to run up the score on the
anti-gunners. We must fight any and all attempts to place new
restrictions on our 2A rights and work equally hard to repeal existing
restrictions. We must not compromise with those who want to compromise
I expect the Court will likely find things like licensing,
registration and background checks Constitutional. The licenses will
have to be shall issue, of course. I know this doesn't sit well , but
I think it will be politically necessary to prevent a serious assault
on the 2nd Amendment itself. The gun banners know that if the majority
of people are satisfied with the regulation that's out there there,
will be no support for what they want, which is a complete ban on
private firearms ownership. Please be careful what you wish for.
The pendulum doth swing and swing back again, and once having swung
will certainly return. This isn't a new debate, any more than Roe v
gay marriage, women's rights, drug legalization, or any of the other
favorites. Sooner or later, the Court will shift, and we'll see a
decision on the
exact opposite side. Which is why, if something is really to be done
there would need to be a clear-cut Constitutional Amendment one way or
There probably isn't any form of gun control that does any good at
all, but, politically, it doesn't matter.
I really don't know that this is true. There are quite a few forms of
that I think have been extremely useful. Just off the top of my head,
training before you could receive a license seems useful.
Required training for a Constitutionally protected rigth? I don't
cheap, defective imports was useful
Banning defective imports is an entirely different animal and not
really "gun" control.
. I suspect we could argue back and
over many of them, and it would be nothing but opinion, since it is
kind of difficult
to prove these things one way or the other.
Actually, quite the opposite.
Check out what the government (CDC) said.......