Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: cosmicforce who wrote (1895)	10/9/2000 11:50:31 PM
From: Selectric II	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10042

Re: "Whether or not Al Gore wins, his ability, as Executive, is limited by the Constitution and he would have to get Congress to send him a bill banning all weapons." As to the Congressional part, I don't think so. Clinton and the liberals already have found a way to side-step Congress, throwing our three-branch, checks-and-balance system out of whack. The method: government-sponsored LITIGATION with activist judges, a la the tobacco lawsuits, and the nascent gun lawsuits already underway by some municipalities. If Gore were elected and these anti-gun suits were heard by anti-second amendment (or just anti-gun) trial judges, and/or justices at the Supreme Court who accepted the liberal anti-gun argument, poof! No more gun rights, and decided without Congress. The judges appointed by the next president are going to be important for a lot of reasons. Lots of our rights and freedoms are under review right now. How about the lady who was handcuffed and arrested for not wearing her seat belt? That's before the Supreme Court right now. How would a Gore appointee rule on that? Maybe, "It was for her own good. The police were just protecting her from herself." Talk about telling somebody what to do with their own body? Pittooey.