Government files amicus -- on DC's side!

[Hazcat]

"In a move designed at least in part to protect federal gun laws from being struck down, the new brief urged the Justices to uphold an individual right to a gun and adopt a flexible standard for judging specific laws..."

Sounds like "Yeah, it's an individual right that is open to govt interpretation as to what that means. 

Pure BS.  Just more smoke and mirrors to make you feel good (Individual right affirmed) while actually sticking it to you (a flexible standard).

[ismram]

I'm sorry guys for sounding so cynical on my earlier post,  but I am very frustrated. If one of those left, left left wing Dems wins in a landslide. All we'll hear is the people have spoken, and the country needed a change to  the left. The media will have a field day with it. I hope too hell I'm wrong!!! (But I don't think so!)

[Pathfinder]

I'm sorry guys for sounding so cynical on my earlier post,  but I am very frustrated. If one of those left, left left wing Dems wins in a landslide. All we'll hear is the people have spoken, and the country needed a change to  the left. The media will have a field day with it. I hope too hell I'm wrong!!! (But I don't think so!)

Not if good, strong 2A candidates are sent to Congress.

[tombogan03884]

Nancy Reagan gave us the answer to gun bans, "Just say NO". what can UNARMED liberals do to us? Give us harsh looks ?
    I suggest that we pick one day and put 20 Thousand gun owning voters at EVERY state capital. 20 Thou x 50 states = 1 million gun owning voters. Patriots day is to close, maybe 4 July, or Bill of rights day, has to be before the election
   Now I'm off to put this to the NRA.

[Tim Burke]

I am no longer in the business of voting for the "lesser evil." The lesser evil is still evil.

Agreed. Unfortunately, the only candidates left that aren't evil are Ron Paul and Fred Thompson.

I'm not impressed with the parsing of the brief, either. If the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right (and it does), then the text is clear: "shall not be infringed."
Strict scrutiny isn't even the appropriate standard; arguing for a lesser standard is stabbing us in the back.

[Sponsor]

[m25operator]

OK Guys, and Gals, what do we do about it? Don't sit on our laurels, e mail, write, post and blog til the cows come home. I plan to put this on all the republican candidates websites and see what comes up, I'm not a bonafided Huckabee guy, but at the last debate, He brought up the 2a as the one that protects all the others, probably feel good stuff, but He was the only one who brought it up, without a question to respond too. I know, I've been bit by a Governor from Hope before. But is definitely time to be vocal, not just gab amongst our selves. Anybody got a plan, a proactive plan?

[tombogan03884]

See this weeks shooting wire

[Bill Stryker]

I think I'll put in my 2 cents on this.

I just took my absentee MI primary ballot to the township clerk's office on the way to the gym. I am way over 60 so that's the way I get to vote. I like Fred. But I did not vote for him. He never set foot in my state to ask for my vote. I like Duncan as well. I did not vote for him either. Because neither Fred or Duncan has any chance at all in Michigan. So, I voted for the one I thought could beat the Democrats. At least the RINOs have to pretend to pay attention to us. The Dems do not ever pay attention and pursue agendas that are hurtful, e.g. higher taxes, more hateful gun control.

Further the 2006 election sent a strong message to the Republicans left in Congress. Congress where the laws start is the more important place to me. A RINO president who can't get the support of Congress is better to me than a Dem president who has a Dem Congress to back him or her to do bad things.

I will vote in November as well. And I will vote again for the candidate that I think will be best for the country. To hell with this lesser of two evils thinking. You have to vote one way or the other that's it. That is the way it works. If you don't go to the polls and vote, you are voting for the bad guys in the race.

I am not entirely happy with the government's brief. But there better be other briefs for the Supreems to consider as well or I have been sending money to the NRA for many years for naught. I see the subject brief as what one would expect from the ATF and the Justice functionaries -- no surprise there. True, I would have hoped for some more adult supervision from Bush, but he ran on support for the AWB and signed McCain Feingold. So there is no surprise there either, even though I hoped for better. I KNOW it would have been worse with either Gore or Kerry. And will be worse with H. Clinton.

That's a lot for 2 cents.

[storm1911]

George II has followed in his father's footsteps. Neither has really done any favors for us gunowners. I voted for George II twice, and he was still better than either Democrat opponant.  That's not saying much. We should have asked, no, demanded that Bush II turn back all of the garbage restrictions, including surplus ammo and guns, from Clinton and Bush I. The rank and file Republicans badly need to regain the party from the party royalty that gave us Bush I, Dole, and Bush II.

[Rastus]

"In a move designed at least in part to protect federal gun laws from being struck down, the new brief urged the Justices to uphold an individual right to a gun and adopt a flexible standard for judging specific laws..."

Sounds like "Yeah, it's an individual right that is open to govt interpretation as to what that means. 

Pure BS.  Just more smoke and mirrors to make you feel good (Individual right affirmed) while actually sticking it to you (a flexible standard).

Chill out kewl cat ....I'm sure they'd be stickin' you with something flexible....

They'll probably need that mirror and want to have a smoke afterwards..... 

SCOTUS....it just sounds nast, doesn't it?