XPost: can.talk.guns, alt.guns, alt.rec.guns   
   XPost: talk.politics.guns   
   From: me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net   
      
   "Scout"  wrote in message   
   news:RtsGi.3384$282.2534@trnddc01...   
   >   
   > "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.   
      
   I note that Lief keeps ignoring this. Wonder why?   
      
      
   >>  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)