If you want to read more information about H.R. 648 go to:
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr648.html
Posted on 03/12/2003 12:57:31 AM PST by 2nd_Amendment_Defender
A good bill has been introduced that will protect citizens right to self defense. Law-abiding citizens, seeking only to provide for their families' defense, are routinely prosecuted for brandishing or using a firearm in self defense.
The courts have granted immunity from prosecution to police officers who use firearms in the line of duty. Similarly, law-abiding citizens who use firearms to protect themselves, their families, and their homes against violent felons should not be subject to lawsuits by the violent felons who sought to victimize them.
Please support HR 648, the "Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2003".
108th CONGRESS 1st Session
H. R. 648
To protect the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the enforcement of such right.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
February 5, 2003 Mr. WILSON of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A BILL To protect the right to obtain firearms for security, and to use firearms in defense of self, family, or home, and to provide for the enforcement of such right.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the `Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2003'.
If you want to read more information about H.R. 648 go to:
http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr648.html
Representative [Insert name here],
A good bill has been introduced that will protect citizens right to self defense. Law-abiding citizens, seeking only to provide for their families' defense, are routinely prosecuted for brandishing or using a firearm in self defense.
The courts have granted immunity from prosecution to police officers who use firearms in the line of duty. Similarly, law-abiding citizens who use firearms to protect themselves, their families, and their homes against violent felons should not be subject to lawsuits by the violent felons who sought to victimize them.
Please support HR 648, the "Citizens' Self-Defense Act of 2003". I look forward to seeing your actions in this area.
If you were truly a defender of the 2nd amendment, you would not be advocating asking for permission from your government to exert a "right" that already exist.
At the federal level, as you know, the 2nd amendment states the right to "...keep and bear arms..." That last time I looked up the definition of "bear" in the dictionary, it stated to "wear on oneself."
If you live in Missouri, like I do, Art 23 of the Missouri Bill of Rights also states each citizen has the "...right to keep and bear arms..."
Exert your right to "...bear arms..." without asking for permission from your government.
This bill gives people who exercise the 2nd Amendment rights protection from those who desire to sue them for merely defending themselves with a firearm. How does this violate the Constitution?
The government cannot give what it does not possess.
They CAN, however, make silly unconstitutional laws that all "law abiding" citizens [subjects] will obey until someone is forced into challenging such, thus becoming a "precedent" (not the right term, but I forget the term). IMHO, this will be how SCOTUS will skirt the issue should a second amendment issue arrive on their doorstep which they cannot refuse cert. IOW, they will say that since there was no "public outcry" when the unconstitutional laws were passed, then they must be alright. Constitution be damned. If our congresscritters pass enough laws "giving" us permission to excercise our constitutional rights, then what good is the constitution...we should just ask congress for whatever we want...right?
People who bear arms in self-defense, even if they are not LEO's, should not be penalized for causing grief to those who perpetrate criminal acts. I suspect this proposed Act comes out of the Florida case where the dad protected his little son by shooting (but failing to kill) a threatening intruder.
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.