Posted on 04/18/2007 4:58:33 PM PDT by Flavius
The first quarter of 2007 has come to an end, and we saw two important gun bills introduced at the federal level. They both would have a profound effect on our Second Amendment rights. One bill is all about freedom and the other is all about control. Since both of these bills are important, all Second Amendment activists must be fully informed about H.R. 1096 and H.R.1022.
H.R.1096, also known as the “Second Amendment Protection Act of 2007”, was introduced by Representative Ron Paul. Unfortunately, it has no co-sponsors. This bill is all about freedom, and restoration of our Second Amendment rights to what was envisioned by our founding fathers.
H.R.1096 is short and to the point. It repeals the 1993 Brady Bill which established a waiting period/instant check system. You can read why the instant background check system may be a bad idea here. It also repeals the “Child Safety Lock Act of 2005” and the “sporting purpose” distinction. The “sporting purpose” distinction is able to be used to ban certain types of guns. You can read the entire text of H.R.1096 here.
Representative Paul introduced H.R.1096 because he feels that the government should not infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms. Unfortunately, there is very little chance that H.R.1096 will pass. However, it is a great opportunity for you to contact your representatives and tell them that you want them to support the true meaning of the Second Amendment.
It should also be noted that representative Ron Paul has recently started his campaign to win the Republican nomination for President. You can learn more about his campaign here.
H.R.1022, also known as the “Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007”, was introduced by Representative Carolyn McCarthy. Over 30 co-sponsors have signed onto the bill and it is a nightmare for gun owners. It is a TRUE threat to our Second Amendment rights, it MUST be taken seriously.
H.R.1022 has often been referred to as the “Clinton Gun Ban On Steroids,” because it goes way beyond the now defunct Clinton Gun Ban. It will reauthorize all of the stuff you hated about the Clinton Gun Ban, such as the ban of high capacity magazines and certain cosmetic features on semi-automatic rifles.
It also bans a large number of firearms by name. It bans all of the “usual suspects” like the AK variants, AR variants, and the Uzi. However, it also bans firearms such as the Kel-Tec Sub Rifle, Ruger Mini-14, and the Hi-Point Carbine. In addition, it also bans certain shotguns such as the Armscor 30 BG.
The complete text of H.R.1022 is available here. It contains the complete list of firearms and features that would be banned.
We cannot stress enough the need to get involved in defeating H.R.1022. If this bill passes, it may very well be due to our apathy.
Contact your representatives today and urge them to OPPOSE H.R. 1022. However, even that may not be enough. If you have not already done so join, or financially support, the national Second Amendment organizations who are opposing H.R.1022. For example, the National Rifle Association (NRA), Gun Owners of America (GOA), and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). Together we can defeat it.
“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.” —Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria in On Crimes and Punishment (1764).
Thanks for the information, Flavius. May I gently point out that you didn’t provide any working links? I’d like to read this new bill that Rep. Paul has written.
“This bill is all about freedom, and restoration of our Second Amendment rights to what was envisioned by our founding fathers.”
In that case, it can only mean to take up arms for the defense of a state under the organization of a militia! That is all it meant to the founders.
I can’t find the Jefferson quote in any of his writings.
the quote I wrote?
Quote by:
Cesare Beccaria
(1735-1794) [Bonesana, Marchese di] Italian nobleman, criminologist, and penal reformer
Source:
Dei delitti e delle pene, [On Crimes and Punishments] ch.38 (1764) Translation is as quoted by Thomas Jefferson in his Commonplace Book.
I can’t find anything attributed to Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria. LOC has most, if not all his writings.
Okay—I was trying to mash on what you posted—LOL! I’m getting old.......
NO co-sponsors!
It did not.
Wrong. Read some of the quotes regarding the right of the people to keep and bear arms and who comprises the referenced militia that are taken from speeches and papers of Madison, who composed the text of the 2nd Amendment, and of other members of Congress and state conventions who voted for or ratified the amendment. Most of those quotations are available online, Google them up and read a few.
Even honest anti-gun liberals such as Lawrence Tribe, the highly respected Harvard law professor, acknowledges that the amendment means what it says, namely, that the people have a right to keep and bear privately owned arms for all lawful purposes In that period "arms" meant all types of weapons of war, therefore a ban on so-called "assault weapons" and full auto firearms is as unconstitutional as any law could possibly be.
Plus, the phrase "bear arms" was not a term used in relation to private ownership of firearms. This is why quakers find bearing arms religiously objectionable but not private ownership of guns.
I don't have Tribes latest remarks on the subject, but in one of his books I think he only acknowledged the 2nd "recognizes a right," not that it was a right.
Of course you can believe what you want about the amendment, but most of the statements in your last post are at odds with the educated opinions of a rapidly growing number of constitutional scholars who have rightly concluded that the amendment was intended to protect an individual right to possess and carry private arms. The D.C. district court agreed in it's recent decision which, providing it still stands after review by the full court, will overturn the D.C.'s Draconian gun laws. It can only be a matter of time until the SCOTUS will have to revisit the amendment to try to determine it's original intent in light of the large volume of recent 2nd Amendment scholarship. I only hope that Bush gets the chance to replace Stevens with an originalist Justice before his term expires.
sad times
i guess to the bitter end
Your right, I’m stocking up on auto loading centerfires, and ill do what they did in canada when they came to confiscate their guns, “it fell in the lake officer”
Its too bad our reps dont listen to us anymore, i live in a state where wimps rule and wonder why crime rate is so high..oh well
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.