Link was a little scrawed.  Had two "http"'s.
I think the url tags don't work right if you put the http inside.

[url]www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1763[/url]

Let's try it like this.

Norm


[url]www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=1763[/url]

I always forget that there is an extra http included when you "cut" from a secured site.  Thanks.


Edited cause I aint great at spellin

Man, those people are going to give me heart disease!  Why wont they hurry up already!

Ya know, if I'm not mistaken there are three or five judges.  There must be a split with the middle guy not sure yet, otherwise they probably would have had a decision by know.  But what do I know...

It was a three judge panel, two of which own guns.  One commented on Mateja's position that it shouldn't bother him (Mateja) that between the two of them they had enough guns to "supply a South American revolution" or something to that effect.  

The longer it takes the more I fear that they are trying to come up with legalese weasle-words that will state "Yes, the right to possess firearms is an individual one, but the government has compelling state interest in regulating them that overreaches the "shall not be infringed" clause".

And I keep hoping I'm wrong, that they're finally going to make the Supreme Court answer the damned question.