Below is a copy of a Letter to Editor I wrote that was published in the Washington Times [ D.C ] in 2009 in response to a proposed gun control bill.
This has nothing to do maybe with this thread but I believe it is something to think about when we all talk about the 2nd amendment . My apologies to anyone who may be offended by it's content but please remember ......
Haynes vs. United States and what a liberal Supreme Court means to this gun thread ...
Oldog
""""Editor ,
Lost in all the hype in the gun debate is what logical minds do when all others bloviate , that is think out all angles to the present problem .
Lets say for the sake of argument the liberal utopia of a gun free America becomes law , It most certainly will have some requirement of gun registrations as part of the law .The liberals can not help themselves but too require it
So what you ask ? Haynes vs. United States is what . In Haynes vs. United States ,{ 390 U.S. 85 [1968] } the Supreme Court ruled 7 to 1 [ Marshall did not participate in the ruling ] that requiring convicted felons to register their illegal guns would force them to incriminate themselves , which is prohibited by the Fifth Amendment .
Since this is obviously the controlling precedent it would mean that only law-abiding people could be convicted for violating the new law .
Haynes was not some technical loophole , it upheld another constitutional foundation we have under our constitutional republic form of government ., and is still the law of the land .
The liberals would not create a law that only protected criminals and expect it to reduce crime would they ? I must point out that most major crime and all the mass shootings of late , happened in gun free zones . """