Bill to repeal Lautenberg Amendment introduced!

[wasp69]

I would personally love to see Lautenberg shot down but I don't think at least the 10th amendment will truly be restored until the 14th and 15th amendments are repealed.

[SteveH]

Unfortunately, I think the title is likely to cause a snicker by almost any lawyer. They almost never make use of the 2nd or 10th amendment in modern law practice. (I am tempted to delete "almost" in the previous sentence.)

And it cannot be blamed on the lawyers by themselves, since the federal circuit courts have played such a large part in eviscerating at least the 2nd Amendment. (Go to a law library and read the federal digests to verify.)

A better title might be something along the lines of "The Ex Post Facto Law Removal Act". I don't think there is a congresscritter around who can stand up at a town hall meeting and explain why he or she would vote against something with that name. Just my dos centavos...

[marktwain]

Yes, this is good. We need to be on the offensive. Lautenberg is widely abused, and is used as a tool by the opposite side in divorce cases. I have seen some real police state tactics used with this idiocy.

[Joe Brower]

[Jerrybob]

This is very good. This is the most un-American piece of garbage ever enacted by a legislature anywhere.

When this first became law, I wrote to then-Senator Spence Abraham (now GW's Secretary of Energy) to complain. I received a nicely-worded letter which informed me that, when people commit certain crimes, they LOSE THEIR PRIVILEGE TO OWN A FIREARM. Exact words.

And here I thought I was living in America. When this is repealed, it will not be one moment too soon. Legislators who voted for this should be ashamed.

[timestax]

bump

[Centurion2000]

LOSE THEIR PRIVILEGE TO OWN A FIREARM

Hmmm ....

[ez]

"Mr. Forester, don't you think, er, that is, don't you agree, that, um, anyone who has a semi-automatic weapon, ought to, ah, turn that weapon in?" Frank Lautenberg. (paraphrased)

[TC Rider]

Mr. JONES of North Carolina

Let's here it for Walter Jones, since Jesse's retirement, the undisputed, most conservative, Carolinian in the Congress!

[caltrop]

Would I be expecting too much if I were to expect the NRA to support this?

[justshutupandtakeit]

Those amendments will never be repealed any more than the 13th will be. What would lead anyone to repeal the 14th? Or the 15th? You think states should be allowed to restrict voters to people of a certain color or race?

Trying to stuff some meaning into the 10th by removing those two sounds a bit far-fetched. I realize that much of the reason it was originally added was to protect and reassure slavers but tying it to the 14th and 15th makes it appear that was ALL it was intended to do.

[aristeides]

The RATs in the Senate could prevent this repeal with a filibuster. I wonder if the Lautenberg Amendment could be rendered a dead letter by stripping all funding for its enforcement out of congressional appropriations.

[FSPress]

Do I hear a compromise proposal before the ink is even dry on the oringinal bill.

[aruanan]

Yes, it's author is back in office....
No.

Now it's out in the open....
Yes.

[FF578]

The 14th amendment was never properly ratified. It is should be void.

The purported 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution is and should be held to be ineffective, invalid, null, void and unconstitutional for the following reasons:

1. The Joint Resolution proposing said amendment was not submitted to or adopted by a Constitutional Congress per Article I, Section 3, and Article V of the U. S. Constitution.

2. The Joint Resolution was not submitted to the President for his approval as required by Article I, Section 7 of the U. S. Constitution.

3. The proposed 14th Amendment was rejected by more than one-fourth of all the States then in the Union, and it was never ratified by three-fourths of all the States in the Union as required by Article V of the U. S. Constitution.

[supercat]

(7) Some of the strictest gun control laws are found in cities where the number of incidents of guns being used in violent crimes is the highest. Therefore, the Lautenberg amendment does not reduce incidents of domestic violence.

Much as I would like to see the Lautenberg Abomination repealed, the above is a non-sequitur. I think it would be better to mention that many restraining orders are reciprocal and do not involve due process, and that this abomination is more likely to disarm victims of domestic violence than perpetrators (a man doesn't need a gun to kill a woman; a woman may need a gun to defend herself from a man).

[supercat]

This is the most un-American piece of garbage ever enacted by a legislature anywhere.

Unfortunately, I believe that over 50 of the Senators who originally passed the Lautenberg Abomination are still in office. Anyone have a roll call?

[justshutupandtakeit]

What is your source for such claims?

[FF578]

Click Here

All the cites are listed near the bottom of the page.