From: [j r h] at [mustang.us.dell.com] (Randy Howard)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns
Subject: NRA fails, SAF cleans it up?
Date: 2 Jun 1994 22:55:58 GMT

I was interested by my mail last night.  A got a letter from the NRA
asking for more money to lobby politicians with.  The basic content
was that they needed more cash to bribe the politicians because HCI and
their cohorts are now spending more than the NRA is.

In the same mailbox was a note from the Second Amendment Foundation.
They were asking for money to help fund a Supreme Court constitutional
challenge to the right of Congress to ban the possession of guns and
put gun owners in jail.

Before I give a summary of the details, I'll make an editorial comment.
I see these two organizations as not overlapping.  SAF makes little or
no effort on the front end at election time, all of their work is 
basically legal.  The NRA on the other hand puts no effort on the back
end trying to reverse laws that are unconstitutional or just blatantly
wrong.  Short answer "When the NRA fails, the SAF tries to clean up
the mess".  I'm a member of both, and intend to stay that way, until
they make that illegal too.  :-()

Ok, here's the scoop on what they're up to:

"The case is an appeal by the anti-gun Clinton Administration from a
Federal Appellate Court ruling that invalidated the Gun Free Zones Act
of 1990 which made it a federal crime to possess a firearm within 1,000
feet of a school.

"The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in New Orleans, ruled that 
Congress has failed to specify that it had the power to enact the law.

"The Appellate Court also suggested more broadly that the law intruded 
into the realm of gun ownership and might be unconstitutional for
Congress to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

"THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FEDERAL COURT RULING IN SUPPORT OF OUR GUN
RIGHTS THAT HAS COME DOWN IN OUR LIFE TIME...AND I BELIEVE WE MUST 
DEFEND IT ALL THE WAY TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT.

"In his opinion declaring the law unconstitutional, Judge William Garwood
of the 5th circuit gave this description of the statute's scope:

	The Gun Free School Zones Act extends to criminalize any
	person's carrying of an unloaded shotgun, in an unlocked
	pickup truck gun rack, while driving on a country road
	that at one turn happens to come within 950 feet of the
	boundary of the grounds of a one-room church kindergarten
	located on the other side of a river, even during the
	summer session when the kindergarten is not in session."

"Other anti-gun measures pending in Congress could well be found deficient
and unconstitutional under the 5th Circuit Court's approach."

"I have been told by a source close to Sarah Brady that her anti-gun
rights group is preparing a "friend of the court" amicus curiae brief
to file with the Supreme Court arguing that we have no right to keep and
bear arms.

"It was a brief of this kind that they filed and a U.S. Court of Appeals
read that helped them get a 2 to 1 decision to uphold the Morton Grove,
Illinoiss handgun ban."

--- back to me ---

Ok, they claim they'll need about $60,000 to file the brief properly for
the Supreme Court.  Donations to the SAF are tax deductible.  I REALLY
enjoy putting an itemized deduction to "Second Amendment Foundation" on
my income tax return each year.  If you interested in helping to reverse
some of these laws, instead of just trying (and sometimes failing to 
prevent them in the first place) contact the SAF at:

	Second Amendment Foundation
	James Madison Building
	12500 N.E. Tenth Place
	Bellevue, WA  98005
	(206) 454-7012






-- 
Randy Howard ([j r h] at [mustang.us.dell.com])     Dell Computer Corp.         
Politicians and diapers are similar ... they both require frequent
changing, and for the same reason.