2dogs
February 21, 2003, 06:35 AM
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31165
Guns at the big bench
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 21, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
There may finally be an opportunity for the Supreme Court of the United States to rule on the nature of the Second Amendment. With any luck and no small dose of sanity, the high priests of justice will agree to hear the case and affirm for all time that this nation's right to keep and bear arms is as sacred as all other constitutional amendments.
At issue is a case being supported by Citizens of America and KeepandBearArms.com, in the form of a lawsuit challenging the California semi-auto rifle ban. The suit disputes the ban on the basis of the Second Amendment protection of an individual's gun rights. If it makes it all the way to the Supreme Court – and it should – it would be the first Second Amendment case to be heard by the Supremes since 1939. Just four justices need to agree to hear a case.
According to KeepandBearArms.com, the history of the suit has its roots in a 1999 law passed by California's Democrat-controlled government. The law banned the sale, manufacture, or importation into the state of all semi-automatic rifles having combinations of arbitrarily-selected ergonomic features, such as detachable magazines, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and pistol grips. If you already owned such a rifle, the edict said you must register it with the state.
The following year California attorney Gary Gorski filed suit in U.S. District Court challenging the ban, but it was tossed out.
"Gorski [then] appealed to the infamously liberal, frequently overturned U.S. Ninth Circuit Court," says an analysis published by KeepandBearArms.com. "As expected, a three-judge panel dismissed all of Gorski's claims," but did agree with him that retired cops were not "super citizens" and, hence, should also be covered by the ban. Gorski remained undaunted, however, as did a handful of gun-rights activists including RKBA and COA. They, and a few others, believe now is the time to have the question answered once and for all: Can ordinary Americans bear firearms, and are restrictions and bans on bona fide firearms legal under our supreme law of the land?
Truth is, the Second Amendment is perhaps the most abused of all. If you doubt that, consider that few Americans would tolerate holding other parts of the Constitution – say, the First Amendment – to the same stringent standards as the Second (you must have a license to speak; you can only go to the kind of church the government approves of; you must endure a waiting period before voicing your opposition; only certain types of government redress are permitted).
Even the nation's top courts cannot agree on the Second's simple language.
The Fifth Circuit Court has written that the Second Amendment "protects the right of individuals, including those not then actually a member of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to privately possess and bear their own firearms." But the liberal Ninth Circuit has ruled that the amendment "guarantees a collective right for the states to maintain an armed militia and offers no protection for the individual's right to bear arms." Who's right?
History would indicate the Fifth Circuit has the best grasp on the true meaning of the Second Amendment. Immeasurable works, including ample quotes from our founders themselves, would seem to prove that. But clear as it may be, politics too often has clouded better judgment in regards to gun rights. Judges, appointed for their political view rather than their constitutional prowess, often skewer interpretations to reflect personal opinions. Seldom has that been more true than in the case of gun rights.
"Because of insane, unconstitutional gun control edicts, good people are being sent to prison, having their families torn apart, bank accounts destroyed – they're even being killed – all for simply exercising their rights," says Brian Puckett of COA. "We urge everyone to get behind this case."
I hope the Supreme Court does. In this age of danger and terrorism, it's high time for the high court to reaffirm America's right to keep and bear arms.
If you can help out financially, please do.
Guns at the big bench
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 21, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
There may finally be an opportunity for the Supreme Court of the United States to rule on the nature of the Second Amendment. With any luck and no small dose of sanity, the high priests of justice will agree to hear the case and affirm for all time that this nation's right to keep and bear arms is as sacred as all other constitutional amendments.
At issue is a case being supported by Citizens of America and KeepandBearArms.com, in the form of a lawsuit challenging the California semi-auto rifle ban. The suit disputes the ban on the basis of the Second Amendment protection of an individual's gun rights. If it makes it all the way to the Supreme Court – and it should – it would be the first Second Amendment case to be heard by the Supremes since 1939. Just four justices need to agree to hear a case.
According to KeepandBearArms.com, the history of the suit has its roots in a 1999 law passed by California's Democrat-controlled government. The law banned the sale, manufacture, or importation into the state of all semi-automatic rifles having combinations of arbitrarily-selected ergonomic features, such as detachable magazines, folding stocks, flash suppressors, and pistol grips. If you already owned such a rifle, the edict said you must register it with the state.
The following year California attorney Gary Gorski filed suit in U.S. District Court challenging the ban, but it was tossed out.
"Gorski [then] appealed to the infamously liberal, frequently overturned U.S. Ninth Circuit Court," says an analysis published by KeepandBearArms.com. "As expected, a three-judge panel dismissed all of Gorski's claims," but did agree with him that retired cops were not "super citizens" and, hence, should also be covered by the ban. Gorski remained undaunted, however, as did a handful of gun-rights activists including RKBA and COA. They, and a few others, believe now is the time to have the question answered once and for all: Can ordinary Americans bear firearms, and are restrictions and bans on bona fide firearms legal under our supreme law of the land?
Truth is, the Second Amendment is perhaps the most abused of all. If you doubt that, consider that few Americans would tolerate holding other parts of the Constitution – say, the First Amendment – to the same stringent standards as the Second (you must have a license to speak; you can only go to the kind of church the government approves of; you must endure a waiting period before voicing your opposition; only certain types of government redress are permitted).
Even the nation's top courts cannot agree on the Second's simple language.
The Fifth Circuit Court has written that the Second Amendment "protects the right of individuals, including those not then actually a member of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to privately possess and bear their own firearms." But the liberal Ninth Circuit has ruled that the amendment "guarantees a collective right for the states to maintain an armed militia and offers no protection for the individual's right to bear arms." Who's right?
History would indicate the Fifth Circuit has the best grasp on the true meaning of the Second Amendment. Immeasurable works, including ample quotes from our founders themselves, would seem to prove that. But clear as it may be, politics too often has clouded better judgment in regards to gun rights. Judges, appointed for their political view rather than their constitutional prowess, often skewer interpretations to reflect personal opinions. Seldom has that been more true than in the case of gun rights.
"Because of insane, unconstitutional gun control edicts, good people are being sent to prison, having their families torn apart, bank accounts destroyed – they're even being killed – all for simply exercising their rights," says Brian Puckett of COA. "We urge everyone to get behind this case."
I hope the Supreme Court does. In this age of danger and terrorism, it's high time for the high court to reaffirm America's right to keep and bear arms.
If you can help out financially, please do.