Lori, you are up way too early.

My excuse is suffering from a nasty virus.

Good blog entry, tho.

Have a good'un.

Reckon I should say something relevant, while I'm on this--

My first wife got fairly regular death threats whilst she was a f'n Public Defender (! cripes, she's trying to help these bozos).

The anti-gun crowd is essentially telling her and me we're screwed, we just have to wait until some deranged monster stalks us down and kills us.

Gee, thanks guys.

I don't have a gun anymore, but our society has got progressively more violent since then. Stories like these make me want to run out and get a few.

If those politicians cant read what the constitution for what it was written about then they should step down i mean these idiots just read as far as WELL REGULATED MILITIA. And you cam bet how the liberals espciealy the liberal left-wing news media will react LIKE CHICKENS WITH THEIR HEADS CUT OFF

Is is just me or has this verdict been virtually ignorde by the MSM? I might of missed something since I didn't catch any network news this past weekend. Has FOX done anything on it?

The introductory clause in the Second Amendment has an interesting history;

When the first Congress convened on March 4, 1789, James Madison, who had previously advocated passage of the Constitution without amendments, now pressed his colleagues to act on a bill of rights. When his initial efforts failed to produce any response, he drafted his own version of a bill of rights and presented them to members of Congress on June 8 of that year. His version of what would later be the second amendment read:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed, and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.

. . .

At that point, the Senate took up the Bill of Rights. Unfortunately, Senate debate on the issue was held in secret, and therefore no record exists of that body's deliberations. The Senate form of the second amendment now described the militia not as "the best security" of a free state, but as "necessary to the security" of a free state, an even stronger endorsement than Madison's original description. The Senators also omitted the phrase describing the militia as "composed of the body of the people." Elbridge Gerry's fear that future Congresses might expand on the religious exemption clause evidently convinced the Senate to eliminate that clause as well. Even more important, however, was the Senate's refusal of a motion to add "for the common defense" after the phrase "to keep and bear arms.". Thus the American Bill of Rights, like the English Bill of Rights, recognized the individual's right to have weapons for his own defense, rather than for collective defense. In this form, Congress approved the Second Amendment and sent the Bill of Rights to the state legislatures for ratification.

US v Emerson

While I was helping my 14 year old with his howmework tonight I came across a study papaer he had in his social studies book. It is a quick synopsis of the Bill of Rights and for the Second Amendment it says the following:

"Gives state militias the right to bear arms or keep weapons"

No wonder we end up with adults who don't know what the 2nd amendment really means!!

TO STEVE ... of March 12, 07

THANK YOU ... for your anecdotal story about your 14 year old.

IF / After we win the DC Supreme Court case, I plan to use it when I talk to students as an example of their govt propaganda/brainwashing machine and the dangers of govt "schools."

cheer-z, "Rich"

Dick Anthony Heller