Whether the Second Amendment Secures an Individual Right

[Kelly J]

I downloaded this Doc, from the web back in 04 and have it on CD Rom, Word Doc., and PDF Doc., format if any one would like to have a copy I can e mail it to you it only takes me 5 min. to send it by my dial up server the doc. is 769KB in length.

This was the doc. that was sent to then Att. General Ashcroft that publicly affirms the 2nd. Amendment as a right of the people not the state or Militia to Keep and Bear Arms.

It is a good read, and is a Doc. that is in the Public Domain.

 

[Molon Labe]

You don't need the Constitution, Ashcrost, the DOJ, Congress, SCOTUS, or anyone or anything else to tell you you have an individual right to keep and bear arms. Their opinions do not matter. You are your own boss. If you believe you have an individual right to keep and bear arms, then you do.

 

[Kelly J]

Molon Labe

Yes Sir, I agree with you 100% but the problem is as you well know there are a lot of Democrats that if they had thier way would change that in a heart beat, and it is also a fact that when you consider that less than 1/2 of the population cast a vote then it is also clear that the Right although granteed by the Bill of Rights is not beyond thier reach to change if they can continue the POSION THEY HAVE BEEN SPREADING FOR A LONG TIME NOW, we simply can not take our rights for granted and must be on the watch at all times to make sure they don't undermine them, if you remember back there was a back door attempt to ban all ammunition that was attached to a bill in congress that came a heartbeat from being passed into LAW. Thankfully it was cought at the last minute and defeted had it not we would not have any need for this forum as it would be agianst the law to have, use, mfg. or posses ammunition, there by effectivly banning Firearms by a back door approach rendering them useless, except as a club.

 

[Henry Bowman]

Once again, it's not a question of whether the RKBA is an individual right. No intellectually honest person can argue otherwise. The devil is in the detail (which was included in Ashcroft's letter) that "shall not be infringed" means "subject to reasonable regulation." :banghead: