Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 17:59:56 -0700
From: r.destephens@WORLDNET.ATT.NET (Richard DeStephens)
Subject: Re: Brotherton and Beyond
To: AZRKBA@asu.edu

This is State Representative Bill Brotherton's lastest response to me.

Bill Brotherton wrote:

> Dear Ricky:
>
> I don't know what you do for a living, but you obviously aren't an
> attorney. I imagine if you were you would starve. I understand your
> sincere desire to have the law be as you would LIKE it to be, but the
> Supreme Court, Congress and various state legislatures and state
> courts have a different view. I think the Justices on the U.S. Supreme
> Court understand the law alittle better than you, an untrained layman.
> If I were anti-gun as you say, I doubt I would own firearms as I do.
>
> Granted I am not an extremist on this issue as you are, but by no
> stretch of logic does that make me anti-gun. As one he
> Vice-Presidents of the NRA said, its bad enough that they have to
> fight the anti-gun extremists, but we have to fight the pro-gun
> extremists too. You are in a DISTINCT minority, not only among the
> general public but among gun owners. I am a mainstream elected
> official who garners support from Republicans and Democrats alike.
> Reasonable firearms control legislation IS constitutional as
> determined by the courts. While you have a right to your opinion, you
> aren't on the Court so you don't decide. This legislation is also
> supported overwhelmingly by the public at large. One of the things
> you would know, if you were legally trained, is we don't run the
> country on every old quote of the founding fathers. The Constitution
> was designed as a flexible framework of government. If you really
> thought your view of the law and Constitution were correct I imagine
> you would file suit against these various pieces of gun control
> legislation and get them thrown out by the courts. You don't do that
> because you know your view isn't accepted by the courts or the public
> at large.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard DeStephens
> [mailto:r.destephens@worldnet.att.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 18, 2000 10:30 PM
> To: Bill Brotherton; azshooting; anti-antigun
> Subject: Re: Brotherton and Beyond
>
>
> Bill Brotherton wrote:
>
> > Arguing firearms control as a moral issue is a slippery
> > slope. I don't think it can be equated to slavery.
>
> It can be linked to slavery. How many armed slaves were
> there throughout history? One of the first things
> the southern states did after the 13 amendment was ratified
> was to insure that the newly freed slaves were
> unarmed. The term Saturday Night Special has its roots then.
> The term was not as PC then. The full term,
> as you may know, was "Niggertown Saturday Night Special" and
> was used to villify and outlaw the cheap guns
> that the negroes could afford to ath


Visit the Crazy Atheist Libertarian
Visit my atheist friends at Heritics, Atheists, Skeptics, Humanists, Infidels, and Secular Humanists - Arizona
Arizona Secular Humanists
Paul Putz Cooks the Arizona Secular Humanist's Check Book
Some strange but true news about the government
Some strange but real news about religion
Interesting, funny but otherwise useless news!
1