(no subject)

From: mighty_xerxes@mypad.com
Date: Mon May 22 2000 - 15:34:37 MDT

At 3:56 PM -0400 on 5/22/00, Michael S. Lorrey wrote:

>This past monday, in case it wasn't in your local paper (and
>considering they way they lean usually, it probably wasn't), the
>Supreme Court ruled in favor of the defendant, Lopez, in deciding
>that the Gun-Free School Zones Act is unconstitutional in its overly
>broad claim under the Commerce Clause.


U.S. v. Lopez, 519 U.S. 549, was decided in 1995, five years ago. That is
probably why it wasn't in your local paper.

>They ruled that a person carrying a weapon on school grounds or
>within 1000 feet of school grounds does not fit the definition of
>engaging in interstate commerce. With this ruling, we have one more
>nail in the coffin of gun control. The fact this came so soon after
>the Million Mutha March (oops, make that the 100,000 mom march)
>indicates that the conservative block of Rhenquist, O'Connor,
>Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas that steadily maintains the fundamental
>principle that "Every law enacted by Congress must be based on one or
>more of its powers enumerated by the Constitution", will likely
>continue on this track when and if it hears US v. Emerson next year,
>and that even if the 'million' mad muthas are able to shrewify their
>way into forcing congress to pass a registration law, it will likely
>be struck down based on this and other precendents. Note that ALL gun
>control laws at the federal level are solely based upon the Commerce
>Clause, while state and local laws are based on US. v. Miller..and
>US. v. Emerson overturns US v. Miller... Bye, Bye, Rosie O'Donnell,
>Bye, Bye, Sarah Brady. Don't let the door hit

Free email with cool domains at FriendlyEmail

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:31 MDT