XPost: can.talk.guns, alt.guns, alt.rec.guns   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net   
      
   "Leif"  wrote in message   
   news:1189737624.821247.322340@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...   
   > On Sep 13, 10:44 am, "RD (The Sandman)"   
   >  wrote:   
   >> "Spaz"  wrote   
   >> innews:9LCdnZ1NOcJU5HXbnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@comcast.com:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> > "RSweeney"  wrote in message   
   >> >news:tq2dnRvRTuoP9nXbnZ2dnUVZ_sqinZ2d@comcast.com...   
   >>   
   >> >> its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be   
   >> >> infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it   
   >> shall   
   >> >> not be infringed by Congress.   
   >>   
   >> > That's true.  So there's no reason the local government of San   
   >> Francisco   
   >> > can't implement their own gun ban.   
   >>   
   >> Actually, there are two.   
   >>   
   >> California state laws - San Fran is not a home rule city   
   >>   
   >> And Presser v Illinois   
   >>   
   >> --   
   >> RD (The Sandman)   
   >>   
   >> "Once you sacrifice rights, it's hard to get those rights protected   
   >> again."   
   >>   
   >> Senator Dianne Feinstein, on White House pressure to expand government   
   >> surveillance, meant for suspected terrorists.   
   >>   
   >> Too bad she doesn't feel that way about other rights like the right to   
   >> keep and bear arms.   
   >   
   > Leif speaking:   What the Supreme Court said in Presser is that the   
   > Second Amendment is a limitation on the federal government only:   
   >   
   > "But a conclusive answer to the contention that this amendment [the   
   > Second Amendment] prohibits the legislation in question lies in the   
   > fact that the amendment is a limitation only upon the power of   
   > Congress and the National government, and not upon that of the   
   > States."   
   >   
   > In other words, the Second Amendment tells us what Congress and the   
   > National  government CAN'T do.   
      
   I once again accept your admission that most, if not all, current federal   
   gun control legislation is Unconstitutional.   
      
   >  It does not tell us what the states   
   > can or can't do.   
      
   Yet, the 14th Amendment certainly does address this.   
      
   And oh, the 14th makes no provision for allowing a "selective incorporation   
   doctrine", hence such a doctrine is a violation of the 14th.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)