On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 02:28:42 -0700, R. LaCasse
<Heisei_Emperor@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>Subject: GRNC Update 6-27-08: DC v Heller - Let the Lawsuits Begin!
>From: nyreg@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 21:16:19 -0600
>
>Grass Roots North Carolina(r), P.O. Box 10684, Raleigh, NC 27605
>
>919-664-8565, www.grnc.org, GRNC Alert Hotline: (919) 562-4137
>
>GRNC Update 6-27-08:
>
>DC v Heller - Let the Lawsuits Begin!
>
>Second Amendment Battle Far From Over
>
>"We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second
>Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all
>Americans." - from the majority opinion written by Supreme Court
>Justice Antonin Scalia.
>
>From GRNC President Paul Valone:
>
>By now, most of you have begun celebrating the landmark decision
>handed down for the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v.
>Heller. Finding for the plaintiff, the Supreme Court struck down both
>D.C.'s virtual ban on gun owner****p and its draconian mandatory gun
>storage law.
>
>No longer will you have to endure decades-long propaganda from
>Handgun Control et al. that you don't have a right to keep and bear
>arms, or that the Second Amendment denotes a "collective right" of
>states to form militias such as the National Guard.
>
>Okay, go ahead and gloat (just a little)
>
>Yes, some of the quotes from the opposition are priceless: Whining
>for the minority, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote: that the majority
>"would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a
>choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wi****ng to
>regulate civilian uses of weapons."
This part of Stevens' dissent is unbelievable. Yes, Your Honor,
limiting the tools available to elected officials to regulate
civilians is **precisely** what the Second Amendment is all about. Not
just the Second, but every single one of the Amendments in the Bill of
Rights is a limitation on GOVERNMENT, not citizens.
How someone can become a judge, much less a Supreme Court Justice,
without grasping this fundamental concept of high school civics is
difficult to fathom.
>
[snip]
>
>Celebration's over: Back to work
>
>They say every party needs a pooper, and that would be me.
>
>The bad news is that there is plenty the Court didn't say, and plenty
>that it indicated could pass constitutional muster, including
>concealed handgun bans, and possibly licensing and registration. Most
>significant was the Court's failure to advocate a "strict scrutiny"
>standard by which to judge other gun laws.
>
>So large are the loopholes, in fact, that "USA Today" continues to
>slather for new gun laws: "...nothing the court said should stop the
>push for limits that will still be legal under the new framework"
>which, according to the paper, could include legislation to shut down
>gun shows, drive gun dealers out of business and ban semi-automatic
>firearms.
>
>Suffice to say that three things are obvious: First, litigation will
>be required to determine the scope of "acceptable" gun laws; second,
>the vast majority of what is currently on the books will stay that
>way; and third, gun control advocates will continue trying to make
>your right to keep and bear arms little more than a theoretical
>concept.
>
>In this election year, DO NOT LET DOWN YOUR GUARD!
>
Right on.
The difference is that after decades of being on the defensive, gun
freedom advocates can now act to make things better.
|
