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.

[pabianice]

Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 12:26:27 -0400

Subject: poll to repeal 2A

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

Vote now. Vote often.

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

Some background on the author of the bill to reoeal the 2nd Amendment:

------------------------------------------------------

-----------

John Aravosis is founder of Wired Strategies and a dedicated Marxist gun-grabber. He has served as the "online organizer" at the Children's Defense Fund (the lunatic-Left group that aggitates for laws to allow children as young as 10 to divirce their parents and live the Marxist lifestyle). At CDF, John Aravosis devised and implemented the online strategy for the successful CHILD Act campaign, gaining the passage of a new $24 billion federal program to assist uninsured children. He was also responsible for creating and managing one of the nation's earliest, largest and most effective child advocacy email/fax networks -- providing policy information and action steps to over 5,000 child advocacy organizations, media representatives, government agencies and concerned citizens from Tennessee to Tanzania. The success of CDF's online network is discussed in the book NetActivism, by O'Reilly & Associates. In addition, CDF's home page -- with Aravosis' assistance -- was recognized by YAHOO! as one of the Web's top sites.

His public commentary on Internet advocacy and online privacy issues includes talks and workshops at National Education Association, Georgetown University, American University, HandsNet, the Public Relations Society of America, InterAction, and Hogan & Hartson law firm. Aravosis is also co-author of the online advocacy chapters of two books about the Internet and non-profits, is the subject of a chapter in the new book The Net Effect: How Cyberadvocacy is Changing the Political Landscape, and has been published in the Economist, the New Republic, the New York Daily News, CyberWire Dispatch, and Who Cares magazine.

In addition to his expertise in online strategy, Aravosis has significant political experience, having served five years as a legislative attorney for US Senator Ted Stevens, and assisting on the campaigns of Senators Ted Kennedy and Chuck Robb. He also has a long record of international experience, having worked for: the World Bank; the Lyonnaise des Eaux in Paris, France; the US Embassy in Buenos Aires, Argentina; the Italian Embassy in Washington, DC; and former national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski. In addition to English, Aravosis speaks Spanish, French, Italian and Greek. Wired Strategies' current and past clients include the US Department of State, the US Department of Health and Human Services, the United States Information Agency, Priceline.com, MicroStrategy, Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide, the Widmeyer-Baker Group, the Georgetown University Law Center, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, America's Promise, the National Education Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, and AFSCME.

John Aravosis has a Juris Doctor and Master's in Foreign Service (1989) from Georgetown University, where he studied under former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

Contact information:

info@wiredstrategies.com

Wired Strategies

Washington, DC - USA

202/328-5707 (phone)

202/328-5708 (fax)

[Militiaman7]

This guy is a real POS!

[SouthernFreebird]

and without guns people would do what the palis do. This is a stupid idea to think taking away guns will stop murderers.

[M Kehoe]

Like when I see a "PETA" article on FR, I am reminded to slaughter a lamb for the barbie. So when I see a gun grabber article on FR I am reminded to buy more ammo.

Thanks for the post.

5.56mm

[BenLurkin]

It's like waht the words to the song say: "Stockpile weapons while you can."

[bandleader]

MEGA DITTOS TO THAT!As Mr.Heston so eloquently put it"They Can Have My Guns When They Pry Them From My Cold,Dead Fingers"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[IronJack]

Johnny boy: You will repeal the Second Amendment only when I've fired my last round on the last battlefield of the last war, as I draw my last breath and the gun slips from my hands.

Molon labe, girlie boy. Have your goons fill out their toe tags. Save the coroner some work.

[Doug Loss]

"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."

I think this quote says it all. This guy seems to think that our rights are granted to us by the government, the exact antithesis of the philosophical principle that underlies our entire Constitution. There are no "constitutional rights," only inherent rights mentioned in the Constitution for the purpose of forbidding the government from infringing on them.

[HairOfTheDog]

I suppose it would freak this guy out if we started chanting this:

This is my rifle!
There are many like it but this one is mine... (.wav sound file)

[ikka]

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

This statement alone shows he is an idiot. Ashcroft has not been increasing the rights of gun owners - they have always had the rights. He is doing the Constitutional thing and removing the illegal barriers that have prevented people from exercising their pre-existing rights.

[ALS]

[DWSUWF]

Shouting ‘Gun Control’ in a dangerous world is the moral equivalent of shouting ‘Fire’ in a crowded theater.

Neither are free speech issues, both are criminal acts.

The mere advocacy of gun control should earn those who do it a minimum of 20 years in the penitentiary, at hard labor.

The effective imposition of gun control should earn those who do it death on the gallows.

[Noumenon]

So I wrote a response to this idiot, and this is what I got in return. What a liar!

Aravosis: What is it with you people? Repeal the Second Amendment? I mean, I'm glad you're reading the article, but it's like mass hypnosis or something. The article never even suggests repealing it.

At 08:31 PM 10/17/2002 -0700, you wrote:

Ward Dorrity: About your contention that it's time to repeal the Second Amendment to the Constitution. I will not bother you with things like reason, facts, history, philosophy or moral arguments. It has been my experience that folks like yourself lack the price of admission to any sort of reasonable discussion regarding an individuals right to self defense. Yeah, I know, it s a first-principles sort of argument that liberal gun-grabbers always lose. I haven't got the time or the patience to try and sort my way through the Disneyland of logical fallacies and name calling to which leftists, liberals and other soft-core fascists invariably resort.

So let me lay it out for you in terms that you cannot fail to understand. The repeal of the Second Amendment will be the proximate, but not the only cause of the next American Civil War. Remember the phrase, "after a long train of abuses?" You know - from that pesky old document the Founding Fathers wrote? Repeal of the Second Amendment will be the last car in that train for many of us.

But do us all a favor, will you, John? That is, if you have the stones to live your convictions. Please be one of the first to show up at my door to demand that my family and I hand over our weapons. That's when we'll all understand what lies at the end of every statist argument - the barrel of a gun. As a man of reason and good will, I'll never start a fight. But I've got the training, the means, the motivation and scariest of all - to folks like you, anyway - the moral certainty to finish one.

Ward Dorrity
September 11, 2001
Never forgive. Never forget.

[m1911]

Umm, actually this is the only thing he says about repealing the Second Amendment:

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?

The title is wrong. So is the author, but he didn't call for repeal anywhere in this article.

[Mulder]

There are no "constitutional rights," only inherent rights mentioned in the Constitution for the purpose of forbidding the government from infringing on them.

Even if the 2nd amendment were repealed tomorrow, I and every other American would still have the Right to keep and bear arms as we see fit.

[Mulder]

bang

[Mulder]

Shouting ‘Gun Control’ in a dangerous world is the moral equivalent of shouting ‘Fire’ in a crowded theater. Neither are free speech issues, both are criminal acts.

Well stated. The advocacy of gun control is nothing less than an act of sedition against the US Constitution, and should be dealt with as such.

[DWSUWF]

"...The advocacy of gun control is nothing less than an act of sedition against the US Constitution, and should be dealt with as such..."

I'm a cock-eyed optimist enough to believe that we may yet see a day when this will come to pass.

I'll volunteer for anything except the burial detail. I'm too boogered up with arthritis to do that.

And traitors don't need individual graves anyway. A dozer out at the landfill will do just fine for them.

[DAnconia55]

Eliminating all the Antis, would solve the problem. And they're unarmed....

That's what a civil war would be, I suppose.

[Mulder]

Eliminating all the Antis, would solve the problem. And they're unarmed....

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

A few Americans would see such an event as a reason to get involved in the political process by writing their local newspapers, voting, and putting bumper stickers on their cars.

Most Americans, however, would see a target rich environment.