http://www.legacy.com/ns/sarah-brady-obituary/174552528
I remember vividly where I was when the assassination attempt took place that resulted in the wounding and disability of her husband.
Walked back into Watervliet's gym during baseball practice to get another bag of balls. Ron Farac the track coach was ashen and told me what had happened.
Then things played out over time.
I understand her passion against firearms after what her husband went through, but denying people their Constitutionally guaranteed rights owing to an extreme incident is not good law. Nevertheless, RIP Sarah.
Who lost their musket (or AK-47) to protect themselves against Guvmint because of Sarah Brady?
I was unaware the Bill of Rights defined 'arms' as being flintlock muskets only. Must have been in the fine print.
(04-05-2015 09:50 AM)BroncoPhilly Wrote: [ -> ]I was unaware the Bill of Rights defined 'arms' as being flintlock muskets only.
At the time the Bill of Rights was written-adopted, that was pretty much the arms available.
Bill of Rights didn't originally do much for African-Americans or women, either.
Times have changed-evolved. Laws should with them.
Right, all you have to do is call a Constitutional Convention by getting 2/3 of the states to agree to call one, then getting 3/4 of the states to agree to your amendment.
Good luck.
"Should" is different than "will."
If Brady Act is "not good law" why has it not been repealed or overturned, especially with current makeup of Congress?
Certainly don't want to deny those with history of mental illness or more so convicted felons their Constitutional rights.
I'm just glad it wasn't Marsha Brady.
(Cue Steve Buscemi):
"Marcia, Marcia, Marcia!!"