Changes

:I can respect your thoughts, Ben.  Not being a Lawyer, I don't know myself how a state's gun control laws might jibe with recent SCOTUS ruling, which was pretty narrow I believe.  Andy might have something to say about this issue, if and when he reads this. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]_{<small><small>/Admin</small></small>}^{[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]} 06:57, 23 November 2009 (EST)

:I can respect your thoughts, Ben.  Not being a Lawyer, I don't know myself how a state's gun control laws might jibe with recent SCOTUS ruling, which was pretty narrow I believe.  Andy might have something to say about this issue, if and when he reads this. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]_{<small><small>/Admin</small></small>}^{[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]} 06:57, 23 November 2009 (EST)

::I've been working on this very issue, and am filing a brief with the Supreme Court today in the McDonald case that will decide this issue.  Ben is certainly right to question indoctrination doctrine as a whole, and the conservative Chief Judge of the Seventh Circuit ([[Frank Easterbrook]]) sided with Ben's view.

::I've been working on this very issue, and am filing a brief with the Supreme Court today in the McDonald case that will decide it.  Ben is certainly right to question indoctrination doctrine as a whole, and the conservative Chief Judge of the Seventh Circuit ([[Frank Easterbrook]]) sided with Ben's view.

::That said, I think this is a rare example where federalism is enhanced by nationalism, as predicted by James Madison's ''Federalist No. 10''.  Sometimes nationalism is needed to protect against local tyranny.  Marriage is another such issue.  This use of nationalism to protect against local tyranny was an intent of the Founders just as Madison spelled out in that Federalist Paper, and the Second Amendment should be first in line for that treatment.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:09, 23 November 2009 (EST)

::That said, I think this is a rare example where federalism is enhanced by nationalism, as predicted by James Madison's ''Federalist No. 10''.  Sometimes nationalism is needed to protect against local tyranny.  Marriage is another such issue.  This use of nationalism to protect against local tyranny was an intent of the Founders just as Madison spelled out in that Federalist Paper, and the Second Amendment should be first in line for that treatment.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:09, 23 November 2009 (EST)