CHECK OUT WEDNESDAY'S DOWN RANGE RADIO PODCAST FOR EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEWS WITH SECOND AMENDMENT SCHOLAR DAVID HARDY AND TOP JOURNALIST JIM SHEPHERD!
From veteran gun blogger Gullyborg:
As far as I am concerned, I am done with George W. Bush. I have spent most of the last few years of my political life apologizing for him. No more.
[...]
And now... the last straw.
The Solicitor General, an agent of the Bush administration, has submitted a brief in the upcoming DC gun ban case that... SUPPORTS THE GUN BAN!
That's it. Done. No more apologies.
I tend to be a single issue voter when it comes to guns. For the last several elections, I've basically supported the Republican Party without looking to hard at individual positions on gun rights. After all, most Republicans are far, far better than most democrats on guns. The Clinton administration gave us the assault weapons ban. The Republicans who took over allowed the ban to expire without renewing it. That was good enough for me on my single issue, allowing me to look at other things like national security, the judiciary, and fiscal policy. And... President Bush has come up lacking on these issues. But I always felt the need to apologize because, damn it, at least with W in the White House no one was going to take away our guns.
I can no longer continue to believe that.
If this is the way a Republican administration responds to a constitutional challenge of the outright ban on handguns in our nation's capital, then the time has come to remove the blinders and return to single issue voting. If the Second Amendment fails, all our other rights become meaningless. Our next President HAS to be one who will support and defend the Constitution, all of the Constitution, and especially our Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Who will that be?
4 comments:
Unfortunately, it's worse than that! It's not just about handguns, it's about ALL guns. After all, a locked gun that isn't usable is NO gun. If at the point that it is unlocked and operable it becomes illegal, it's NO gun. This is a parallel to the old ploy of making ammunition either too expensive through taxation, or downright illegal
(a. k. a.,"lead", scary. etc.). So, you can have the gun, but you can't use it without ammunition. Or how about having to weld the barrel shut as was required over-sea? You can still have it.
Now that we've said all of this though, what do we do? The media is avoiding this as a mainstream issue. By doing so, they're also convincing the general public that it isn't an issue. Even Fox News can't be ignorant of the fact that this is all going on. Are they unsupportive, or even biased?
Other than the NRA and few sympathetic scholars, who will represent the Constitution?
Life Member
I agree that this is the last straw. The Republicans have shown that they are little better than the Democrats when it comes to our rights. I think there should be a massive move to the Libertarian Party. I don't agree with everything they stand for, but by God, they are 100 percent in favor of the 2nd Amendment!
Libertarians are always saying that if they can get the gun nuts and the pot heads together, they would run the country.
I think that the basis of the libertarians is that you accept that there are liberties that you may not value but other people do and together you have to willing to fight as one for the protection of both.
Here is a link to all the amicus briefs filed in Heller so far.
http://www.gurapossessky.com/
news/parker/pleadings.html
Post a Comment