--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Nelson" <nelsonriddle2...@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "do.rflex" <do.rflex@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Nelson" <nelsonriddle2001@> wrote: <snip> > > > Most of the crew in DC is in favor of restricting > > > gun ownership almost totally. A little research on > > > the subject will turn up some very disturbing facts. > > > > Only if you get your 'facts' from the crackpot fringe > > wingnut conspiracy loons. Obama has stated plainly that > > he fully supports the 2nd Amendment. There is NO > > congressional support to do anything like you're > > suggesting and neither are there any plans from the > > White House to propose any such thing. > > > Amazing observation- evidently people with this point of > view haven't been following the issue very closely.
Nelson, when you refer to "the crew in DC," are you thinking of the federal government (the administration and Congress), or the local government *of DC*? There may be some confusion on this point because DC itself does not have the same degree of control over its affairs as the states. It does have local government, but Congress has the power to overrule what the local government does, because DC is not a state but a federal district. The local DC government is very much in favor of handgun control in the city because of the high degree of violent crime associated with guns in the city. It had a strong ban on handguns, but the ban was challenged in court, and the Supreme Court ruled last year that the ban was unconstitutional. Congresscritters held forth at the time on both sides of the issue; there were proposals to override the ban with legislation, but ultimately Congress took no action. Obama flip-flopped on whether the ban was constitutional. Anyway, I'm wondering whether you have "DC" the city confused with "DC" the federal gummint. There are no moves to impose gun control on a federal level currently; it's simply not politically feasible.
