POLITICS - US Government in support of DC ban

Post by **Hobie** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 12:37 pm

David Hardy has the scoop.

I can't believe anyone who says who is POTUS doesn't matter. While this is just wrong it could have been worse.

Leverdude · Post by **Leverdude** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 1:42 pm

I can't believe anyone who says who is POTUS doesn't matter. While this is just wrong it could have been worse.

Could have been worse I supose, but it plainly shows how little reality means to our President. Honestly, his opinion & that if his administration should not matter at all. The Constitution is there to limit him, Congress & all of Government. He doesn't have to like or agree with it. But he swore an oath to protect it, not interpret it, water it down or call into question its amendments or fundamental principals.

Wrong is wrong & its not the first time the President has stabbed us in the back. Might be the last but thats a calender thing.

J Miller · Post by **J Miller** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 1:53 pm

I've read the article about this on our ISP. From what I read, the feds couldn't care less about the DC ban. What they are afraid of is that the SCOTUS will vote like they should and then all the federal gun laws back to the NFA 34 will be struck down.
So they are trying to stop it before that happens.

If the feds are worried, then there is more to this case than any of us have been made aware of.

Joe

old goat · Post by **old goat** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 2:23 pm

...Good point Joe! They are doing like the little Dutch boy who stuck his finger in the dike, and trying to stop the flood.

...But don't forget, that all government agencies are financially controlled by the politicians. And most of those who control, are anti-gun.

...old goat

oldmax · Post by **oldmax** » Sat Jan 12, 2008 5:15 pm

There are times when both parties fear there loss of power more than
there hate for each other...

Post by **Ysabel Kid** » Sun Jan 13, 2008 8:04 am

J Miller wrote: If the feds are worried, then there is more to this case than any of us have been made aware of.

Joe

Joe -

When the feds are worried, I'm happy!!!

Here is what the NRA said on this:

Statement of the National Rifle Association By Wayne LaPierre And Chris Cox On The Pending U.S. Supreme Court Case

Saturday, January 12, 2008

In the coming months, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality of Washington, D.C.â€™s ban on handgun ownership and self-defense in law-abiding residentsâ€™ homes. The Court will first address the question of whether the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as embodied in the Bill of Rights, protects the rights of individuals or a right of the government. If the Court agrees that this is an individual right, they will then determine if D.C.â€™s self-defense and handgun bans are constitutional.

The position of the National Rifle Association is clear. The Second Amendment protects the fundamental, individual right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms for any lawful purpose. Further, any law infringing this freedom, including a ban on self-defense and handgun ownership, is unconstitutional and provides no benefit to curbing crime. Rather, these types of restrictions only leave the law-abiding more susceptible to criminal attack.

The U.S. Government, through its Solicitor General, has filed an amicus brief in this case. We applaud the governmentâ€™s recognition that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental, individual right that is â€œcentral to the preservation of liberty.â€