home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky dc.general:3259 dc.talk.guns:24 va.general:179 talk.politics.guns:25540
- Path: sparky!uunet!tnc!m0102
- From: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
- Newsgroups: dc.general,dc.talk.guns,va.general,talk.politics.guns
- Subject: Gun owners lose CT case
- Message-ID: <1885@tnc.UUCP>
- Date: 21 Dec 92 19:59:16 GMT
- Reply-To: m0102@tnc.UUCP (FRANK NEY)
- Followup-To: dc.general
- Organization: The Next Challenge, Fairfax, Va.
- Lines: 72
-
-
- I have posted six times to the dc.talk.guns newsgroup with no
- indication that the system is posting the messages properly. Until
- this problem is resolved, I am returning dc.general to the list of
- xposted newsgroups.
-
- From THE GUN OWNER, an official publication of GUN OWNERS OF
- AMERICA, Inc., Suite 102, 8001 Forbes Place, Springfield, VA
- 22151, 703-321-8585. Larry Pratt, Editor and Executive Director.
-
- COURT BACKS BATF ON MILITARY FIREARMS BAN
-
- The US District Court of Connecticut ruled in July against gun
- owners in an extremely important case. A victory could have set
- a precedent for overturning many of the gun control laws in this
- country.
- The case involved Douglas Oefinger, a member of the
- Connecticut Free Militia (CFM) whom Gun Owners Foundation has
- assisted.
- The laws of Connecticut (and federal law) recognize that
- citizens between the ages of 18 and 45 are members of the
- 'unorganized militia.' Oefinger, as a member of the 'unorganized
- militia,' had applied for permission to import 30 M-14s. The
- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) said no.
- Oefinger took his case to court, stating that the Second
- Amendment recognizes a person's right to own these types of guns.
- The Bush Administration opposed Oefinger, claiming that federal
- law prohibits individuals from importing automatic firearms and
- that the Second Amendment does not guarantee individual rights.
- The Court sided with the government, claiming that Oefinger
- had "no [individual] rights under the Second Amendment."
- Moreover, the Court felt that if any rights were guaranteed to
- individuals, they would still be "subject to [government]
- regulation" (read: infringement).
- The Court also claimed the ban on automatic firearms was an
- important effort in controlling crime. But absent from this
- claim was any evidence for support. In fact, had the Court
- examined the experiences of Switzerland and Israel, it would have
- seen a completely different picture.
- Both countries distribute automatic weapons to their citizens
- by the millions, and yet both have two of the lowest murder rates
- in the world. According to researcher Don Kates of the Pacific
- Research Institute for Public Policy, the armed Swiss only have a
- murder rate of 1.13 per 100,000 people; in Israel, the rate is
- 2.0. The US murder rate is 9.8 per 100,000 people.
-
- -30-
-
- Personal comments:
-
- This court decision is a far cry from the 'ripe for review'
- ruling I saw on the net over a year ago. Either the ruling came
- from a different judge, or it was the same judge who had been
- 'gotten to' by some authority figure.
-
- Either way, we've lost this round. I'm attempting to get the
- full text of the decision, for posting to the net, and to see if
- there is some grounds for appeal. Considering recent decisions
- concerning the meaning of 'the people' in the Consitution, there
- is definitely conflict.
-
- Frank Ney N4ZHG EMT-A LPVa NRA ILA GOA CCRTKBA "M-O-U-S-E"
- Commandant and Acting President, Northern Virginia Free Militia
- Send e-mail for an application and more information
- ----------------------------------------------------------------
- "Whether the authorities be invaders or merely local tyrants, the
- effect of such [gun] laws is to place the individual at the mercy of
- the state, unable to resist."
- - Robert Heinlein, in a 1949 letter concerning "Red Planet"
- --
- The Next Challenge - Public Access Unix in Northern Va. - Washington D.C.
- 703-803-0391 To log in for trial and account info.
-