If it's Dean versus Bush the anti-gunners are screwed

[funkyflathead]

:)

[xray s]

1. why do you say that?

I understand Dean's position on guns to be the states have a right to regulate gun ownership.

[TexasMexican]

3. sort of a step forward.

If dean thinks it should be up to states and not the fed to regulate guns then that is sort of a step forward.

Sucks for people in states like California though.

[jody]

5. But most state constitutions protect an individual's RKBA.

Starting before the Constitution and Bill of Rights were written, PA and VT said.
QUOTE
I. That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property,"
. . . . .
XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state;"
UNQUOTE

Today 28 states recognize an individual's "Right to Keep and Bear Arms" (RKBA) for defense of self and state]: AL, AR, CO, CT, DE, FL, IN, KY, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, ND, OK, OR, PA, SD, TX, UT, VT, WA, WV, WI, WY

Five states recognize an individual's RKBA for the "common defense": AR, KS, MA, OH, TN.

Eleven states say RKBA shall not be infringed": AK, GA, HI, ID, IL, LA, ME, NC, RI, SC, VA.

Six states have no RKBA provision: CA, IA, MD, MN, NJ, NY.

It is interesting that CA, IA, and NJ both acknowledge that a citizen has the inalienable right to defend self and property.

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
QUOTE
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
UNQUOTE

IDAHO CONSTITUTION
QUOTE
ARTICLE I DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1. INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF MAN. All men are by nature free and
equal, and have certain inalienable rights, amoung which are enjoying and
defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property;
pursuing happiness and securing safety.
UNQUOTE

NEW JERSEY CONSTITUTION
QUOTE
ARTICLE I RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES
All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.
UNQUOTE

[jhfenton]

8. Ohio Constitution

jody, I agree with your point, but you need to correct the category that Ohio is in.

Article I, § 4 Bearing arms; standing armies; military powers

The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security; but standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be kept up; and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.

The Ohio Supreme Court has held -- most recently in September -- that the Ohio Constitution guarantees an individual RKBA. There is no mention anywhere of "common defense," either in the Constitution or in the case law.

[Lefty48197]

10. A question for all the Constitutional Scholars in the NRA

Isn't there an amendment that reserves regulatory rights for the states IF AND ONLY IF, that right isn't already regulated by the Constitution? And, since the 2nd amendment already covers firearms, doesn't that mean that states don't have any right to regulate said firearms, thereby making any state constutitional mention of firearms null and void?
Wayne LaPierre and the other constitutional scholars in the NRA will kindly comment.

[jhfenton]

12. That's kinda backwards.

You're referring to the doctrine of federal preemption, either constitutional or legislative. For example, the constitution grants the exclusive "power" to establish a post office to the federal government. That power was relinquished by the states.

The 2nd Amendment, on the contrary, is a restriction on the federal government -- and arguably, following the 14th amendment, on the states -- not an exclusive grant of power over an issue.

Now, of course, the federal government is not bound by a state constitution, so the federal government can pre-empt an area with legislation, assuming that the legislation is within the power of the federal government.

[jody]

14. Thanks for the correction. I'll change my statement.

This should have been posted to your reply correcting my understanding of Ohio's constitution
:hi:

[MrSoundAndVision]

2. I hope

you heed my previous advice, as I can see that this issue is very important to you.

[izzie]

4. We are going to have gun owners. Lets hope with some control.

Dean seems to want that control.

[CO Liberal]

6. As Long As The NRA Stops Operating Out of the Oval Office....

...that's a step in the right direction.

[billbuckhead]

7. Not to worry, Dean has little backbone, he already has slid left on this

position. Besides, he has little chance of being the nominee. The Conflag flap is fatal.

[Lefty48197]

9. I know a lot of the right wing NRA members are pretending to support Dean

but when they go to the polls next November, they'll vote for Bush just like all the other right wingers. They are lying when they say that the gun issue influences their votes. They're Republicans. They'll vote for the Republican nominee everytime.

[billbuckhead]

11. That's pretty obvious NRA will do this but not talked about much

The Confederate flag wavers will do the same thing.

[jhfenton]

13. NRA members

I agree that Republican NRA members will not suddenly vote for Dean just because he is somewhat supportive of the RKBA. There are millions of independent and Democratic gun owners, however, who will not vote for an anti-gun Democrat, but might vote for Dean.

I certainly won't vote for Bush next November, but I simply will not ever vote for an anti-RKBA candidate of any party. If necessary, I'll cast a third-party vote again, as I've done for the last two presidential elections. So there are many voters at stake.