Remember this, folks

Futo Inu

New member
Let's remember to never ever back down on the issue of the second amendment being a FUNDAMENTAL right, equal in all respects to those in the first amendment.

This means many things, but I bring it up because our lovely Attorney General, Ms. Reno, keeps saying that "No one ought to be allowed to have a gun until they have passed a test proving that they know how to use it safely". At first blush this seems reasonable, especially since we are in most states already accustomed to passing the CCW test after taking the class.

But what the antis in the gov't and elsewhere must realize is that, with a fundamental right, the gov't cannot be any prior restraints, just as they cannot put prior restraints on speech. There is an entire body of caselaw on this as to speech, and it applies equally to the second amendment. WHEN and IF you prove yourself a butthole by being CONVICTED of a felony, then "No-guns-for-you" (say it like the Soup Nazi). But until that time, no gov't (fed or state) really has the constitutional right to put a prior restraint on any law-abiding adult's ability to own and use (keep and bear) firearms.
 
Futo, What you have said is very well taken by me and all of our compatriots. What is sad is that quite a few citizens would have no idea of what you are talking about.
My wife let me watch the news tonight 'alway's a mistake' and a 30 ish looking ????? American male made the following statement at a county meeting about gunshows on county property. "I don't care about the Constitution" because he was more interested in his particular agenda.
IMHFAO We cannot pick and choose which parts of the Constitution we would like to uphold.
The government has had 223 or so to dummy as many of us down as they could. I don't think that they are teaching 2nd Amendment rights in citizenship classes today. Just give them a little more time and they will have educated all of their subjects quite properly.
My .01 Hank
 
By Kamrad Reno's logic, we might as well say " No one should have the right to be secure from unreasonable search and seizure until they have passed a test proving that they are capable of obeying the law and intend to". We must do all we can to remind everyone we meet who is sceptical of the 2nd, or even downright hostile, that it is a right just as valid for protection as the 1st, 4th, 8th, and so on. No one proposes 'reasonable' controls on speech (yet), or requiring you to have a 'church license', so why do they (fence-sitters) think it's OK to say 'you-can't-have-this-gun-you-can't-have-that-gun-you-must-get-a-license-you-can-only-have-1-a-month"?

------------------
"Is fhe'arr teicheadh math na droch fhuireach"
-Sarabian Oomodo

If it isn't Scottish, it's CRAP! RKBA!

A firearm isn't a weapon until it is used as such.
 
The entire premise of "Prior Restraint" is in direct opposition to the fundamentals of freedom and personal rights regardless of the issue its directed at. In this case its firearms. Given time, this demon will invade other parts of our lives.
 
Back
Top