NRA Attorney: " YOUR HONOR, WE ARE HERE WANTING TO REGISTER HANDGUNS" to Supreme Court!!

[mike bell]

NRA Attorney:
"œYOUR HONOR, WE ARE HERE WANTING TO REGISTER HANDGUNS."�



by Angel Shamaya
October 13, 2003

KeepAndBearArms.com

-- NRA attorney Stephen Halbrook appears not only unprepared to effectively argue a Second Amendment case, but ready to give up the farm "” to register handguns and call it "œreasonable"� "” when he gets his day in court. Read the annotated transcript of Mr. Halbrook' s oral arguments from court just last week:

D.C. SECOND AMENDMENT FEDERAL COURT HEARING
Annotated Transcript of NRA Case Proceedings
by Roy Lucas
http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/Halbrook.asp

Here is a short excerpt from Mr. Halbrook' s oral arguments last Wednesday, October 8, in a case the NRA calls a "œSecond Amendment"� lawsuit:

THE COURT

: THE GOVERNMENT CAN PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.

MR. HALBROOK

: YOUR HONOR, WE ARE HERE WANTING TO REGISTER HANDGUNS. WE ARE NOT HERE WANTING UNRESTRICTED ACCESS. WE' RE NOT HERE ASKING TO CARRY THEM, OTHER THAN IN THE HOME.

THE COURT:

YOU' RE SAYING THAT THE GOVERNMENT CAN IMPOSE REASONABLE RESTRICTIONS?

MR. HALBROOK:

YES, YOUR HONOR. YES, YOUR HONOR.

[See: http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/Halbrook.asp for the full transcript, with annotations.]


Sarah Brady wants to register handguns, too. Maybe Mr. Halbrook should join her organization to help in their efforts. When you read the full, annotated transcript, the above will be one of many concerns raised.

Arguing a so-called "œSecond Amendment case"� while "œwanting to register handguns"� is working directly against the rights of those who would never submit to such restrictions under any circumstances. Stephen Halbrook is an NRA-paid attorney, and he filed this lawsuit with their support.

Would Thomas Jefferson or James Madison have gone to court to fight a Second Amendment case merely wanting to register handguns in the home? Of course not. Would they have argued for handgun registration in the middle of a court hearing in which they eagerly agreed that the government can impose "œreasonable restrictions"�? Not a chance. Doing so suggests that such an overt infringement on our Second Amendment rights is "œreasonable,"� when it most certainly is not. Treasonable, perhaps...

You do not have to register your Bible, or your computer (First Amendment), so why should you register your firearms (Second Amendment)? Answer: you shouldn' t. But NRA Management and their unprepared attorney obviously disagree "” and they are using members' donations to do just that. Handgun registration is NRA' s idea of leading a Second Amendment court challenge. Yet they' ve been in operation since the late 1800' s and have raised billions of dollars to "œprotect the Second Amendment."�

Americans must realize that NRA management' s "œdefense"� of Second Amendment rights in court litigation is destructive. Fortunately, the current Second Amendment lawsuit most likely to be heard by the Supreme Court "” Silveira v. Lockyer "” is beyond NRA management' s control.

The Supreme Court is very likely to grant a hearing in the Silveira case soon. And thanks to careful legal research spanning the last year, the case is far better prepared than any Second Amendment litigation the National Rifle Association has ever brought in court "” with already-greater judicial success for the Second Amendment than the NRA' s well-paid lawyers have ever managed.

Read the certiorari petition now being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in that case. The arguments for strict scrutiny far surpass what NRA' s attorney weakly suggested to the judge last week: http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/cert.pdf

Mr. Halbrook should study the Silveira petition. He could learn a thing or two and certainly improve his arguments by doing so.

Three weeks ago, the Silveira lawsuit was attacked (and misrepresented) by an NRA-funded writer on a well-trafficked website. He told the world that NRA' s Stephen Halbrook was the man to send to the Supreme Court to win a Second Amendment victory. Perhaps these gentlemen have a different idea of victory than we do.

With the help of grassroots activists, KeepAndBearArms.com is funding the necessary legal research and writing being used in the Silveira lawsuit (and another Second Amendment lawsuit, to be announced soon). More work is necessary, and it costs money to get it done. We' ve publicly displayed our books on funds raised and invested bolstering the case. If you' d like to help, please do by clicking here.

Silveira v. Lockyer Status of Fundraising
http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/funds_status.asp

Silveira Second Amendment Case Needs Immediate Financial Support, and Here' s Why
http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/fundshelp.asp

Silveira v. Lockyer Home Page
http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Silveira/

[strut]

Welcome back Mike, its been awhile since you have been here.

I got that e-mail yesterday, don' t things like that just frost you.

Have we been infiltrated?

[fng]

I' ve told you for several years now that the NRA is a gutless organization.

they won' t fight for ANYTHING. hell the *****s are better legal battlers than these guys.

[Briman]

hell the *****s are better legal battlers than these guys.

Are you a member of the Pink Pistols?

[James B]

Mike. Have you emailed this to the NRA???

[Vapodog]

This is unbelievable...there must be something wrong!!!!!

[Coastie]

Mike, I tried to read through this transcript but did not have the patience this morning to wade through all of the legaleze in order to understand all of it.
What I did pick up is that these two people are in fact in court for the " Right" if you will, to posess a registered handgun in the District of Columbia, that is what the suit is all about, that is why they went to court.
While on the face of it, it seems strange for the NRA to be seeking relief in this manner it is in my view a foot in the door. The Police of the District and the Politicians that run it have taken a dim view of any gun ownership and it is at this point illegal to own a handgun even within your home even though there is (apparently) a law on the books providing for the legal ownership of weapons. The issuing authority of the District, by not approving any licenses (registrations) has in effect made it impossible for legal ownership. This suit is an attempt to force the District to in fact allow people ownership by actually " Registering" guns to law abiding citizens.
The good folks a t Keep and Bear Arms are, and have been, at odds with the NRA for some time in a host of different ways. There is a finite amount of money available from the gun owning public and both of these organizations are trying for every dime they can get their hands on. I believe this article is a self serving piece on the part of Keep and Bear Arms and will only provide ammunition for the antis. We, the gun owners, are not well served by the divisivness of articles such as this and at this point I will await the outcome of the hearing before making any decision as to the merit of the observations within the article.

[kevin1]

Which part of " The right of the people to keep and bear arms" did he fail to understand ?

[James B]

I am up for renuel but I want to get to the bottom of this first. Does anyone have the Email address for the NRA?

[Briman]

The assessment by KAKA.com is complete crap!

I read the testimony. The case was about allowing people in DC to keep firearms in their homes, which they currently cannot do. The suit wasn' t for pushing to allow people to be able to carry mp5 machine pistols in their purses in DC, but to open the door for gun ownership.

Going to court and being a belligerent a-hole and will get you nowhere, reguardless of what KABA.com says. Its baby steps, baby steps. The rights of the people in DC were lost in baby steps, and unless their is some sort of uprising, will never get them back all at once, only in baby steps. The only way DC residents will get tghe chance of owning arms is to have them registered. On a fun note- if government cannot regulate gun ownership and usage to a certain extent, than why don' t all areas of the country allowed concealed carry? and why in most places that do allow it, people have to pay a license fee for this ' right' ?

My problem with gun owners clubs such as kaka.com and some others, is that they talk a good talk, but don' t walk the walk. They don' t provide lawyers for such lawsuits, and they do nothing to promote shooting sports and very importantly safety training. They sit on the sidelines and snipe at the NRA because its the big dog in town and is everything that they will never be.[:@]