Chicago Gun Case Brief Shows Brady Campaign Unreasonable


Brady Campaign files brief in McDonald Supreme Court Case[T]he Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms should not prevent citizens, through their elected representatives, from enacting the reasonable laws they desire and need to protect their families and communities from gun violence.

What they're saying in the Chicago case is essentially the same thing they said in the Heller Washington D.C. case: Gun bans are “reasonable” and consistent with the Second Amendment proscription that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

This does not surprise anyone who has been watching these Brady characters for any length of time. After all, we're talking a group that–in spite of putting on a kinder, gentler public face via a name change–still internally identifies itself by its original name: Handgun Control, Inc.

We're talking about a group that's founder admitted:

We're going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. . . . [W]e'll have to start working again to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen the next law, and maybe again and again. Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time. . . . The first problem is to slow down the number of handguns being produced and sold in this country. The second problem is to get handguns registered. The final problem is to make possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition-except for the military, police, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors-totally illegal. Read more

Source: Gun Rights Examiner



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.