Speaking of which,
I have recently asked a very prominent gun-lawyer who works for my company why the 2nd-Amendment question is not settled once and for all at the Supreme Court level.
After all - I candidly said - how can plain language like "shall not be infringed" be missed by people who can read the rights to abortion-on-demand between the document's lines?
He replied that both sides of the gun issue are "afraid" to bring up that question to the Supreme Court. Settling the issue one way or the other would, for all intents and purposes, kill one of the two "parties" for good.
A supreme Court judgement would either:
a) Decree that the 2nd is an "individual right, thus automatically repealing all the gunlaws in the Country - which the anti-side clearly fears;
or
b) Decide that the language in the Militia Clause makes the 2nd a "State right", thus rendering futile any further attempt to curb the Government's power to "control" firearms - which would spell the end of gun-ownership in America.
"No one on either side of the debate is willing to bet when the stakes are so high" he told me.
Apparently, it is the pending Emerson case in Texas that is being watched by the "insiders" as one which could seriously cripple the antis' present and future legal arguments (if upheld).
Let's keep vigilant.......
------------------
Private gun ownership is the capital sin in the left's godless religion. Crime is merely a venial mistake.
Check out these gals:
www.sas-aim.org