[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: Bush administration backs gun regulation Bush administration backs gun regulation David G. Savage LA Times Monday January 14, 2008 WASHINGTON -- In their legal battle over gun ownership and the 2nd Amendment, gun- control advocates never expected to get a boost from the Bush administration. But that's just what happened when U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement urged the Supreme Court in a brief Friday to say that gun rights are limited and subject to "reasonable regulation" by the government and that all federal restrictions on firearms should be upheld. Reasonable regulations include the federal ban on machine guns and other "particularly dangerous types of firearms," he said in the brief. Moreover, the government forbids gun possession by felons, drug users, "mental defectives" and people subject to restraining orders, he said. (Article continues below) "Given the unquestionable threat to public safety that unrestricted private firearm possession would entail, various categories of firearm-related regulation are permitted by the 2nd Amendment," Clement said. He filed the brief in a closely watched case involving Washington, D.C.'s ban on keeping handguns at home for self-defense. The head of a gun-control group said he was pleasantly surprised by the solicitor general's stand. Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Handgun Violence, said he saluted the administration for recognizing a need for limits on gun rights. Alan Gura, a key gun-rights advocate who is leading the challenge to the District of Columbia's gun law, expressed disappointment at the administration's position. He said he was troubled that Clement advised the justices to send the case back for further hearings in a lower court. "We are not happy. We are very disappointed the administration is hostile to individual rights. This is definitely hostile to our position," Gura said. This year, for the first time, the court is expected to rule squarely on whether the 2nd Amendment gives individuals a right to have a gun despite laws or ordinances restricting firearms. In the past, this amendment has sometimes been read as protecting only state militias. It says: "A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Full article here.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
#1. To: Kamala (#0)
This sounds like our local PD.
There are no replies to Comment # 1. End Trace Mode for Comment # 1.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||