<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Comments for Gun Rights decisions, in the courts, implications of.</title>
        <description>We&apos;re the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost.  All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT,  and KA 2003-2007</description>
        <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html</link>
        <atom:link href="http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/04/gun_rights_deci_rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

        <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Sep 2008 17:54:06 Z</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Movable Type 4.12</generator>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>

        <item>
            <title>Gun Rights decisions, in the courts, implications of.</title>
            <description>We mentioned this when it first came out. The Blogfather, Jonah Goldberg of National Review, has a column on it today, that Oldloadr and I thought of interest. You should, of course, read the whole thing. Considering how badly things have been going for conservatives, right-wingers, Republicans and anyone else whose brain doesn’t explode like one of those guys from the movie Scanners at the thought of another Republican president, it’s worth noting that one of the greatest conservative victories of the last 40 years is quietly unfolding right in front of us. On March 9, the U.S. Court of...</description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 09:51:34 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>

        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Harvey on 2007-04-01</title>
            <description>
                From &quot;pry it out of my cold, dead hands&quot; to &quot;pry it out of my strictly constructed Constitution&quot; :-)
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58481</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58481</guid>
            <pubDate>Sun, 01 Apr 2007 10:42:41 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from BloodSpite on 2007-03-30</title>
            <description>
                I agree.

If you wanted to take it to another level you could.

How many people out there would take the &quot;Pry it out of my cold dead hands&quot; slogan seriously?

If they played tiddlywinks with the Constitution to pull it off? I&apos;m betting quite a few. Your describing something that could be revolutionary, or at the minimum ssplintering in affect not just in politics but in legalities and enforcement. 

Can you imagine trying to enforce such a decision?

Who are you going to get to do it? 
Gun owning Police Officers?
Gun owning National Guardsmen?
Gun owning FBI, or ATF agents?

And even if you could get someone to do it, would you want to be the Agent who knocks on someone&apos;s door to tell them &quot;We want your shotgun&quot;?

Shades of Ruby Ridge

            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58475</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58475</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:42:08 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Oldloadr on 2007-03-30</title>
            <description>
                The task for them (gun-haters) to repeal the 2nd:
2/3 of both houses of congress (they don&apos;t have that now and without a profound shift away from current trends i.e. red state versus blue state, they are not going to get that).  Even if they did, make it through congress, the next hurdle is 3/4 of the several states’ legislatures have to approve by a 2/3 majority.  The founding fathers wanted it to be difficult to change what they had wrought...
BTW, there is no provision for deleting any part of the constitution.  Therefore to “repeal” the second amendment would require another amendment which could go all the way or stop short or who knows what when politicians get at something.
J-P’s point is also important.  There are many who have had no problem with whittling away at gun freedoms, but who would have doubts (moral, ethical, practical, all of the above) about fiddling with the constitution.

            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58471</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58471</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:13:05 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from J-P on 2007-03-30</title>
            <description>
                Repeal the 2nd?  Good luck trying.  Gun haters would lose a lot of support if they switched from &quot;gun control&quot; to &quot;constitutional gun ban.&quot;  There are plenty of folks who hate gun violence, but who aren&apos;t so hardcore as to think that gun ownership should be denied to everyone.  The gun control voting block would splinter into pieces over something like this.
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58470</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58470</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:56:50 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from NevadaDailySteve on 2007-03-30</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[<blockquote>liberals are willing to play by the rules</blockquote>

Until they decide not to play by the rules. What's the name of those rubber sandals again? ]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58469</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58469</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:42:30 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Barb on 2007-03-30</title>
            <description>
                The thought of a cohesive liberal attack on the 2nd amendment itself is creepy.  Then again, the whole &apos;cohesive&apos; part is where I suspect it would fail.  
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58468</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/03/gun_rights_deci.html#comment-58468</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 11:21:06 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>

