House of Rep. news - Second Amendment Task force

[Xela]

A couple of announcements I haven't seen on this board.

Hope it's not a dupe.

(Thanks to Amendment II Democrats for posting it on their blog!)

Xela


BOREN, BROUN ESTABLISH SECOND AMENDMENT TASK FORCE IN U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

WASHINGTON D.C. - U.S. Congressman Dan Boren, (OK-2) was joined today by U.S. Congressman Paul Broun, (GA-10), in announcing the creation of the Second Amendment Task Force (SATF) in the U.S. House of Representatives. Boren will serve as Democratic Co-Chairman, and Broun will serve as Republican Co-Chair during the 111th Congress.

The task force will be charged with monitoring legislation regarding the Second Amendment in the U.S. House during the 111th Congress. It will act as a unified and proactive force to promote legislation that protects the Second Amendment and to fight legislation that poses a threat to citizens’ Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

http://www.house.gov/list/press/ok02_boren/2009_02_25_2nd_task_force.html

Later version:
http://www.house.gov/list/press/ok02_boren/2009_02_26_assault_weapons.html

On Boren:
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=20080515_16_A1_spancl933078

[msongs]

1. all gun owners must be required to join the militia, like the constitution says nt

[jody]

2. All males between 17 and 45 are in the militia. In some states it's all people 17-64. n/t

[DonP]

3. Another one that missed that whole Heller thing?

Nice "antique" gun control argument. Even Brady dropped that line two years ago.

SCOTUS decided last year in Heller vs. DC/Fenty that membership in a militia is not required to own a firearm. It is an individual right.

But feel free to sign up anyway.

[beevul]

4. Not to mention...

The second amendment is a restraint - it binds the government and says quite literally what they may not do.

If you have any doubts, see the preamble to the bill of rights:

THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution


http://billofrights.org/


As I and the aboive paragraph said, the second amendment IS a restraint - it binds the government and says quite literally what they may not do.


And it does so, because a well regulated Militia was deemed by the framers as (is/being) necessary to the security of a free State.


If the framers had decided that it needed to be so because they wanted pizza on tuesdays and fridays, it would mean precisely the same thing, and still be the restraint on government that it is.





It is what it is.

[jody]

5. Now beevul, how can you assert the 2nd "It is what it is" when gun-grabbers have developed their

anti-gun mantra which has more convoluted logic than there are twists in a bowl of spaghetti.

I'm really bothered because some of our political leaders don't have a clue about how to reduce crime in the U.S. but voters trust them to spend several trillion dollars to heal our dying economy.

Those same politicians have yet to diagnose the cause of our economy's illness and without that they certainly cannot produce a treatment plan.

[rq4a]

6. Join the Militia? Hmmmmm, no.

I hate to bust your concepts of law, democracy, and legality of gun ownership on this, but.......

In 2008 the Supreme Court declared gun ownership is not related to the militia or membership with in it.

[X_Digger]

7. Actually, CRA II (1866)..

The Civil Rights Act II (1866) passed after the 14th amendment would seem to dispute the 20th century idea of a link between the second and a militia..

"the right . . . to have full and equal benefit of all laws . . . concerning personal liberty, personal security . . . including the constitutional right to bear arms, shall be secured to and enjoyed by all the citizens."

The CRA II was passed in response to 'Black Codes' passed in the south, which effectively stripped freed slaves of most of their rights. If you look on thomas.gov as well as loc.gov at the (admittedly limited) record of the debate surrounding this act, you'll see that the deprivation of the right of self defense (via the 2nd) was an important issue for lawmakers of the time- nowhere does anyone mention militia service.

[slackmaster]

8. The Constitution says no such thing

And the militia is the people.