I came across this while following another link. It explains how a favorable RKBA ruling by SCOTUS in the Heller case really won't be a defeat for the Brady crew.
Brady Lunacy
What a bunch of maroons.
Brady Lunacy
What a bunch of maroons.
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
ITS TIME TO TEAR THE BRADY BUNCH A NEW a**h***.
ITS TIME TO TEAR THE BRADY BUNCH A NEW a**h***.
Let's kick some ass, if SCOUTUS is in our favor lets run with it and use it as springboard to set the ball rolling in our fight to get our rights back.
I came across this while following another link. It explains how a favorable RKBA ruling by SCOTUS in the Heller case really won't be a defeat for the Brady crew.
Brady Lunacy
What a bunch of maroons.
Although the Brady Campaign expects the Chicago ordinance to be challenged, it thinks that it may survive because it does not have the restrictions on long guns like the ones found in Washington, D.C.
The Chicago law may also survive because a decision in the D.C. case will likely not resolve the issue of whether the Second Amendment applies to the states and other cities that are not federal enclaves.
The Dems are anticipating at least 2 vacancies/court nominations during the next Presidential term.
Whom will be in the Oval Office (and in control of Congress), will decide who will fill those seats.
The unfortunite side I am reading into this is, no matter what happens the Brady gun grabbers will continue to fight their battle California Stye.
Ban certain weapons and make safety on weapons a regulation
Ban certain ammo
Ban carrying in public places
Ban supplies for guns
Ban tranfers of ammo
Make it ridiculously difficult to trade with people in the state on lawful transactions with a never ending supply of regulations, laws and paperwork required.
They are basically saying that they will skirt the second amendment in a covert manner. So to be sure that frog that doesn't know he's being boiled is still in very hot water and they will continue to crank up the temps!
Exactly. McCain is not perfect, but he's better than Obama.
You think McCain will appoint judges who will uphold the constitution? That means they would need to overturn McCain-Feingold. I don't see him appointing someone who would be willing to overturn his legislative legacy.
He also voted for Clinton's appointees, Breyer and Ginsberg.
Better than Obama? Yeah, probably, but well within the margin of error. Neither one of them is good for the country. Neither one will get my support.
McCain promised that, if elected, he would follow President Bush's model in choosing Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr.
That could establish a large conservative majority on the court for years. With conservatives in full control, the court would probably overturn Roe vs. Wade and the national right to have an abortion. The justices also could give religion a greater role in government and the schools, and block the move toward same-sex marriage.
Nonetheless, McCain said he thought that "abuse of judicial authority" had continued unchecked. "The result, over many years, has been a series of judicial opinions and edicts wandering farther and farther from the clear meanings of the Constitution," McCain said recently at Wake Forest University in North Carolina.
As an example, he pointed to the Supreme Court ruling three years ago that struck down the death penalty as "cruel and unusual punishment" for murderers who were under 18 at the time of their crimes. He said the 5-4 decision in the case of Roper vs. Simmons was based on "airy constructs" such as "the evolving standards of decency."
"The result was to reduce the penalty, disregard our Constitution and brush off the standards of the people themselves and their elected representatives," McCain said.
You think McCain will appoint judges who will uphold the constitution? That means they would need to overturn McCain-Feingold. I don't see him appointing someone who would be willing to overturn his legislative legacy.
He also voted for Clinton's appointees, Breyer and Ginsberg.
Better than Obama? Yeah, probably, but well within the margin of error. Neither one of them is good for the country. Neither one will get my support.