Posted on 01/28/2005 9:31:52 AM PST by neverdem
Former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr defended the constitutional right to bear arms against what he called an “anti-freedom philosophy” in a speech about the importance of the Second Amendment at the Emory School of Law on Monday.
Barr, a Republican, told the audience of about 30 people that Americans must do everything in their power to ward off intrusion from the U.S. government and “preserve what privacy and other civil liberties are left to us.”
He warned that many people in America and the United Nations “engage in actions to diminish one’s God-given, constitutionally- guaranteed rights.”
As evidence of mounting pressure on the Second Amendment, Barr cited the San Francisco city council’s consideration of banning the sale of handguns and handgun ammunition within the city and U.N. officials’ engagement in the regulation of the international sale of weapons.
Without weapons, Barr joked, Americans would be forced to defend themselves with duct tape, an item that former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge encouraged citizens to purchase in case of a terrorist attack.
“I wouldn’t want to try,” he said. “I’d rather shoot the son-of-a-gun.”
Barr represented the 7th District of Georgia in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 2003. He served as manager of former President Bill Clinton’s impeachment proceedings.
Barr, who once worked as a U.S. attorney and a CIA official, currently has his own weekly radio show called “Bob Barr’s Laws of the Universe,” which airs every Sunday at 6 p.m. on Radio America, WGKA 920 AM.
In a question-and-answer session following the speech, one audience member asked about Barr’s opposition to the Assault Weapons Ban, which was passed in 1994 but was recently not renewed.
Barr pointed out that guns that are classified in the “assault” category, meaning that they are capable of automatic fire, have been illegal since the 1930s.
He said the law only succeeded in banning weapons that “look mean,” such as weapons that are not capable of automatic fire, but can be fitted with a bayonet.
Barr told the Wheel that he personally owns “more than one” firearm for the purpose of hunting and target shooting.
When asked about his opinion on the registration of weapons, he said that he felt registration is the “first step to confiscation.”
Second year law school student Igor Birman, co-president of the Emory Federalist Society, was excited that Barr was able to speak at Emory.
“Bob Barr has been a firm supporter of ideas that the Federalist Society believes in, such as limited government and strict constructionalism in judicial decision making,” Birman said.
In his introduction of Barr, Birman described him as a “great and honorable gentleman and a fellow patriot.”
The event was sponsored by the Federalist Society in conjunction with Emory’s chapter of the College Republicans.
College sophomore Jenna Gallagher said that Barr was an engaging speaker and that she thought he “had a lot of interesting points.” She was divided on the issue of gun control.
“I understand that it’s important to defend yourself,” she said. “But I wouldn’t want a gun in my house.”
The Second Amendment will always need to be defended against gun grabbers, now and in perpetuity, and for so long as the Republic exists.
"audience of about 30 people"?
" An armed society is a polite society" Robert Heinlein
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have
for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote."
Benjamin Franklin
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!! Full auto weapons are NOT illegal in most states. The 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA) allows any adult who lives in a state where such ownership is legal to buy a full auto gun if they pay a $200 tax, get the permission of a local law enforcement agency, register the gun and go through a background check. I have friends, acquaintances and clients who own full autos. There are something like 200,000 legally-registered full auto guns (called "machine guns" under the NFA, even though most of them are more accurately described as "sub-machineguns"). Barr only diminishes his argument by being inaccurate.
Oh, BTW, since 1934 there has only been 1 documented case of a legally registered machine gun being used in the commission of a crime - and that was by a police officer!
Correction to Post #8: any adult who doesn't have a felony conviction and who meets the other criteria.
Ahhh, what a wonderful thing consistency in thought is. The second half of her sentence contradicts the first half.
Unfortunately, you can only get ones that were made before 1986. The supply is severely limited, with items running about 10x what they should be. While there techinically isn't a MG ban ("just pay your $200 tax"), in all practicality there is. You can't afford an M16 or AK47 or MP5, and simply cannot get an M4 or P90 or MP7 or anything else made post-'86.
They left just enough legal MGs to obfuscate and deflate any "they're all banned - that's unconstitutional!" arguments.
Then, will she "allow" her neighbors to have a guns in their homes? That seems the question.
You are both right. However I would hesitate to condemn Bob Barr too much. He is at least half right. The 200,000 or so NFA registered machine guns are very expensive to acquire. Not that many people can afford one even if they can get their police chiefs to sign off on one. Your average gang banger just can't walk into a gun store and pick one up. There are no NEW machine guns being manufactured which are sold to the general public. For all intents and purposes, machine guns are pretty much illegal. If you tried to convert the Min-14 in your closet to an automatic weapon, you could find yourself in a world of trouble with the BATF.
Could Barr have better explained the situation? Sure.
This is one reason Barr got canned.... The statement is reminiscent of a democrat.... His mustache didn't help either.
Emory was the home of Professor Michael Bellisiles, author of the infamous book/study challenging the prevailing wisdaom that gun ownership was common in colonial America. Hiw work was immediately touted by the gun grabbers as proof that the Second Amendment was not intended to guarantee an individual right to bear arms.
When the bona fides of Bellisiles' research came under fire, Emory did the responsible thing and pointed a committee of scholars to investigate his work. The committee concluded that the research supporting the work could not be substantiated, and Bellisiles ultimately resigned in disgrace. The publisher withdrew his book, and Columbia University rescinded a history prize it had awarded to Bellisiles.
The ever-clownish Ninth Circus actually cited the Bellisiles book in its opinion holding that the Second Amendment guaranteed only a collective, not an individual, right to bear arms. It had to very quickly pull the opinion and put out an amended opinion dropping the citation when Bellisiles work was denounced.
US Code Title 18 Section 922(o) bans civilian possession of any made after 1986. The limited supply of pre-'86 ones is wearing out and being overpriced by increasing demand. A new real M16 should cost about $500; you'll pay about $15,000 for a well-worn >20-year-old one.
For most practical purposes, MGs are illegal.
"No where in the Bible does it say we are guaranteed life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Also, it doesn't mention the right to bear arms. That being said, I agree with everything else Barr said. We can't let the government gently erode our civil liberties."
This has very little to do with the Bible. He is talking about "natural" rights. Given to us at birth. Google up some pages on natural rights and you will find lots of info on this subject.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.