Re: Silveira DENIED Certiorari

George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 

> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003 13:06:31 -0800, "Mike Haas"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>>The United States Supreme Court announced this morning that
>>it has DENIED the Silveira vs. Lockyer Petition for
>>Certiorari. The Supreme Court will not hear the case.
>>
>>We should all be thankful for this. For reasons set out by
>>long-respected RKBA scholars, this case was disaster, now
>>narrowly avoided for the most part. See
>>http://www.calgunlaws.com/ and
>>http://NRAMembersCouncils.com/ for articles.
>>
>>RKBA legal experts strongly suggest that those wishing to
>>support getting a Second Amendment case before the Supreme
>>Court send their money to support a case that does NOT
>>arise in the hostile Ninth Circuit or California.  Note 
>>that there are two Second Amendment cases being litigated
>>in the District of Columbia now, one by the NRA and one by
>>CATO Institute. 
>>
>>Mike Haas
>>
> 
> Any gun supporter who wants a case to go to the Supremes is
> a moron. 
> 
> Right now Americans can own guns.
> 
> There are two possibilities from a Supreme Court ruling on
> whetther the Second Amendment permits individuals, as
> opposed to militias, to have guns 
> 
> 1. Americans can own guns
> 
> 2. Americans, if states so rule, can not own guns.

Well, I think a personal right to have guns under the Second 
Amendment can't be separated from militia service unless 
there's another amendment to simply grant that personal right.  
Either way Congress will then have power to regulate the 
personal right; ATF's function and funding will necessarily 
have to expand, which will truly piss off the gunlobby; NICS 
would have to replace some state background check systems, 
which would make sense anyway; there'd be a new NFA which would 
create a uniform national firearm law so then nearly all gun 
crimes would be felonies and firearm ownership and use, 
including concealed carry, would soon acquire uniform national 
restrictions that supercede state law.

We might be restricted to certain kinds of guns, like single or 
double shot and bolt action long guns, but no handguns; and we 
might have to register ourselves and our guns with fingerprints 
etc with a federal database. 

> There is nothing to gain from a Supreme Court ruling, and a
> lot to lose.

Yeah, maybe they'd say the states should just mirror federal 
firearms regs and treat less serious gun crimes as state 
misdemeanors and more serious gun crimes as felonies.  Who 
knows?

There'll never be any less gun regulation but there'll probably 
be more.

> Are gun nuts - nuts?

-- 

Join the NRA Blacklist!
http://www.nrablacklist.com/

The Lone Weasel