Bill to Repeal the Second Amendment

Wired Strategies ^ | 10/19/02 | Aravosis

[pabianice]

Time to Shoot the Second Amendment

It's time for the war on terror to take away our guns

Commentary, by John Aravosis

Now that the 11th innocent civilian has been mowed down by a sniper in northern Virginia, it's time for the Bush Administration to get serious about the war on terror.

Since September 11, the president and his attorney general have told us that we must give up some of our cherished civil liberties in order to stop the "evil ones" intent on murdering innocent American men, women and children. And while the White House has done a bang-up job of watering down the First (free speech and assembly), Fourth (search and seizure), Fifth (due process) and Eighth (excess bail and fines, cruel and unusual punishment) Amendments to the Constitution to further the war on terror, there's one Amendment they refuse to touch. It's the one that puts all those guns on the streets in the first place: the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Now, I've never been much of an anti-gun nut. I worry about crime as much as the next guy, and particularly with the latest sniper scare in the DC suburbs, I admit that there's something comforting about the prospect of having my own gun. But there's also something comforting about knowing that my government can't tap my phone simply because they don't like my politics, arrest me in secret, keep me from seeing an attorney, or hold me indefinitely without ever charging me of a crime or going before a judge. But to date, I haven't spoken out about any of the infringements on those constitutional rights because I spent September 11, 2001 watching the Pentagon burn outside my living room window, and realized I had more pressing things to worry about.

About Poll

Should Congress Repeal the Second Amendment?

Yes

No

Not sure

Current Results

Yes: 8%

No: 92%

Not sure: 0%

Is the Second Amendment a Suicide Pact?

It's been said too many time since 9/11, but rings no less true today: The Constitution is not a suicide pact. But this Administration seems think the Second Amendment is.

While the Bush Administration has been willing to infringe on the 1st, 4th, 5th and 8th Amendments to the Constitution, they have outright refused to do a thing about guns. Well, that's not completely true. At the same time the Administration's war on terror has been restricting constitutional rights across the board, John Ashcroft's Justice Department has actually been increasing the rights of gun owners. Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) explained this past May that:

"For over sixty years, the Justice Department has interpreted the Second Amendment as applying to those with a reasonable relationship to a well regulated militia. Now, in a stunning reversal of long-held policy, the Justice Department has argued before the Supreme Court that the Constitution broadly protects the rights of individuals to own firearms."

According to Schumer, this abrupt change in policy could hamper the efforts of prosecutors in every state of the union. (You can read more about this issue here.)

Ashcroft Refuses to Search Gun Record for Terrorists

The Bush's Administration's knee-jerk fear of doing anything to restrict the Second Amendment is having real-world consequences in the war on terror. The Washington Post reports that shortly after September 11, 2001, the Justice Department began searching the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) for the names of suspected terrorists (i.e., the FBI was comparing the names of suspected terrorists against federal gun purchase records). But that search was short-lived, according to the Post, as "Justice officials in mid-October (2001) ordered a halt to the effort, arguing that the search appeared to violate the federal law that set up the background check system."

But that excuse simply wasn't true. The Post goes on to report that on October 1, 2001 - a few weeks before the decision to halt the background check search - an internal Justice Department memo written by Deputy Assistant Attorney General Sheldon Bradshaw concluded that "we see nothing in the NICS regulations that prohibits the FBI from deriving additional benefits from checking audit log records" in conjunction with the Sept. 11 probe. The memo goes on to note that the FBI had used the NICS before in other circumstances, and noted that the bureau had used the NICS before in this way. (Read more about this issue here).

In other words, Ashcroft lied to protect the gun-owner constituency at the expense of the war on terror.

Nukes Don't Kill People

Which begs the question: Why didn't the Attorney General use the wealth of information in the NICS database to look for potential terrorists hell-bent on killing millions of Americans? Because the Bush Administration seems to believe that every amendment to the Constitution takes a back seat to the war on terror, except the Second Amendment. Why an exception for this one particular constitutional right, in the face of the greatest threat the nation has faced in 60 years? No answer - though the letters NRA come to mind.

While driving with a friend this past weekend in suburban Maryland, and making sure we pumped our gas in DC before crossing the state line, I thought of the pro-gun adage: "Guns don't kill people, people kill people." And I wondered how President Bush and Attorney General Ashcroft would respond to Saddam Hussein if the Iraq dictator went before the United Nations and argued that there's no problem with rogue states having weapons of mass destruction because, after all:

"Nuclear weapons don't kill people, people kill people."

Putting Special Interests Before National Security

The proliferation of deadly weapons is as much a problem in Alexandria, Virginia as it is in Alexandria, Egypt. I'm not saying that we need to ban all guns or repeal the entire Second Amendment, but using the defense of the Second Amendment as an excuse to not search available gun databases for terrorists? That's criminally negligent.

President Bush recently accused Senate Democrats of worrying more about special interests than the security of the American people. Here's the president's chance to prove that he doesn't suffer from the same problem.

http://uspolitics.about.com/library/weekly/aa101502a.htm

=============================================

This doofus doesn't even know that an affirmative vote by 2/3 of the states is required to amend the Constitution. Guess he got his "juris doctor" in correspondence school.

[vortigern]

This doofus doesn't even know that an affirmative vote by 2/3 of the states is required to amend the Constitution.

Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate

[Fiddlstix]

Bump

[Thumper1960]

***But they would undoubtedly bring in foreign troops, who would be armed.***

Never happen. The US military rank and file wouldn't allow it. Target rich environment would be an understatement. Politicos who went along with such a scheme would be dead men walking. The patriotic element of American citizenry would be overnight guerrillas. After the initial "shock" that our benevolent leaders would dare such a thing, I believe it would become a world-shaking revolutionary epoch.

[Mulder]

Never happen. The US military rank and file wouldn't allow it.

Their idea would be to get the US military all overseas.

After the initial "shock" that our benevolent leaders would dare such a thing, I believe it would become a world-shaking revolutionary epoch.

I think so too, but the power-hungry globalalist tyrants may just get a little too greedy and try it anyway.

[Thumper1960]

"...the power-hungry globalalist tyrants may just get a little too greedy and try it anyway."

I've been pretty testy, lately.
I know what my response will be: Bring it on, pumpkin! Let's see what it's worth to ya.

[packrat01]

I see ther you have a steaming POS. Might I suggest something with less heat?

[Militiaman7]

I've really tried to come up with something witty as a reply but for the life of me I can't.

Good one.

LOL!

[B4Ranch]

Care to write him and ask why he writes titles that don't match the body of articles?

John Aravosis

USPolitics.guide@about.com

John Aravosis is a political consultant and freelance journalist in Washington, D.C.

Experience: Aravosis lives and breathes politics. He spent five years as a senior foreign policy adviser to a Republican US Senator, and has also worked for the Children's Defense Fund, the World Bank, the US State Department, and for former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski. He now runs his own consulting firm, with clients in the US, Europe, Asia and Africa; has visited or worked in 28 countries; and in addition to English, speaks French, Spanish, Italian, and Greek. Aravosis is a frequent political commentator, including appearances on ABC News, CNN, National Public Radio, FOX's "O'Reilly Factor," and CNBC's "Hardball with Chris Matthews." He is also an avid writer, and has been published in the Economist, The New Republic, and the New York Daily News, among others.

Education: Aravosis has a joint law degree and master in foreign service from Georgetown University, where he studied under fomer Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, and also has degrees from the University of Illinois and the Sorbonne in Paris, France.

From Aravosis: "Politics is - or at least should be - about making the world a better place. We Americans are blessed in having a government that listens to our concerns and responds. This site will help you stay abreast of the latest political news, and empower you to have your voice heard in Washington and beyond."

[Dick Bachert]

We're getting some heat from our bean-counters about all the COMPLIMENTARY memberships, but John A is prime material.

John, pick up your free pass at the camp gate.

CAMP GUNFREE.
A common sense and historically proven way to keep those dangerous and destructive GUNS out of YOUR life.
MEMBERSHIPS AVAILABLE NOW!
Details below

Concerned about the easy availability of guns in our society?

Alarmed about the "gun nuts" and other freedom wackos the government allows to run loose?

Wish the government would just repeal the Second Amendment and confiscate all the guns because you believe sensible people shouldn't suffer because of some idiotic notion about some antiquated “right?”

While we can't take the guns away from the people, we CAN take the people (or at least SOME of them) away from their guns.

At CAMP GUNFREE, we have created an atmosphere of near-total tranquility where you and your family will experience the benefits of a GUN FREE environment.

The unique main gate at Camp GunFree. Most arriving camp guests never see this view from their comfortable rail cars.

Each of our camps is a gated community designed to keep guns away from camp guests. Firmly enforced security measures ensure that these dangerous and destructive devices are kept outside. Each camp boasts 24 hour, 7 day a week sentries and state-of-the-art enclosure systems, guard dogs, trenches and surveillance equipment to absolutely GUARANTEE that no firearms enter the facility. Rigidly controlled access ensures that no guns can ever be smuggled in.

No cost has been spared to ensure that Camp GunFree remains gun free.

All camp members are given distinctive uniforms to distinguish them from any gun-toting barbarians who might attempt to evade our security measures. Each camp member is also assigned a distinctive ID number to ensure that only the right people are allowed within the camp.

Room and board are provided to each member in exchange for rewarding tasks designed to provide a sense of accomplishment and to demonstrate that large numbers of people CAN exist in a gun violence free community.

Camp members engaged in one of our many fun-filled organized work activities.

The current headlines prompt us to remind you that there has NEVER been a shooting by a student in any of the camp schools and we can GUARANTEE that there never will be!!

For more information, call 1-800-GUNFREE
OR visit our new website at
http://www.privategunsareabadthingandwe'llseethatyouare”safe”.batf.gov

(This idea from a pamphlet originally created by The Minnesota Center for Individual Liberty, PO Box 32170, Minneapolis, MN 55432-0170)

[m1911]

Following the link, the actual title is:Time to Shoot the Second Amendment

Subtitled:It's time for the war on terror to take away our guns I agree that the title is misleading, but not as misleading as the title of this thread.