Category Archives: Second Amendment

Second Amendment advocates hope to build on recent Iowa successes by ensuring rights

DES MOINES — Matt Windschitl turned a half-swivel in his chair and stuck his right hand out, palm up, stopping National Rifle Association lobbyist Chris Rager from walking out the door.

Windschitl, 28, a member of the House Republican leadership team from Missouri Valley, had just watched his “stand your ground” bill sail through a legislative committee.

“This,” Windschitl said as Rager shook his hand, “is just the start.”

The bill would allow Iowans to respond with deadly force if they feel threatened and would protect them from liability in some cases.

This session Windschitl also has proposed legislation that makes it a crime for local governments to ban firearms from public buildings, lifts the firearm prohibition on the State Fairgrounds and adds wording to the Iowa Constitution that makes it harder to place restrictions on firearm ownership, transportation and use.

Republicans hold a 60-40 majority in the House, but in the Senate, Democrats rule 26-24.

Key senators say that the firearms legislation being pushed now in the House won’t ever make it to a vote in committee in the Senate.

“Our position is we are not doing any of those bills. We don’t think they’re good policy,” said Sen. Robert Hogg, D-Cedar Rapids, vice chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Senate Democrats have a consistent, unrelenting focus on jobs, the economy, education and training, and that’s where we’re focused on, and we’re not going to get into a gun-rights sideshow.”

But legislation can be moved to the floor without going through the committee if a majority of senators votes to do so. That’s where Windschitl sees an opening.

Gun issues play reasonably well across party lines in Iowa. Take, for example, the “shall issue” bill that took discretion away from county sheriffs in issuing gun permits in 2010.

The House voted 81-16 and the Senate 44-4 in favor, and they both had Democratic majorities at the time.

Plus, it’s an election year. And because of census redistricting every legislator will have at least some new constituents to which they may want to show their pro-Second Amendment bona fides.

“We’ve had some conversations with some pro-Second Amendment Democrats,” Windschitl said. “The Judiciary Committee is one committee.”

The legislation that’s caught a lot of attention this session is the pre-emption bill that says the state has the sole authority to regulate firearms, so ordinances by cities, counties and school districts are illegal.

Critics say pre-emption is an overreach by the state. They say public safety and weapons bans are a local control issue, but proponents say a local ordinance doesn’t trump the Constitution.

“I agree with people’s rights to bear arms with certain restrictions to maintain the safety of our public,” said Iowa City Mayor Pro Tempore Susan Mims, who was in Des Moines last week for a presentation on the economic impact of the state’s largest cities.

Waterloo passed a ban on weapons in city buildings after concealed carry passed, Mayor Buck Clark said. He said there haven’t been any problems with weapons being brought places where they are banned, but, he noted, most people can’t get into the Capitol with a firearm.

Craig Robinson, editor of the influential Iowa Republican website, said moving this wide-reaching legislation in an election year is a shrewd political move.

“The gun lobby in Iowa is very strong,” he said. “There are a lot of Democrats, especially those in rural areas, who want to be seen as pro-gun.”

Chris Larimer, an associate professor of political science at the University of Northern Iowa, said the gun lobby might not be all it’s cracked up to be in the state.

“If you think about states with powerful gun lobbies, they tend to be those in which the electorate has a strong or has had a strong anti-government bent,” he wrote in an email.

“The political culture of Iowa, at least recently, has never really been anti-government.”

Windschitl, meanwhile, said he’ll continue to push greater access to firearms for law-abiding Iowans against people who are willing to accept less.

“People don’t understand why our founding fathers recognized that the Second Amendment is a fundamental right.

“There are people who are out there that believe the Second Amendment was written to protect our hunting rights or to have a militia,” he said.

“I believe our Second Amendment right was written to protect us from a tyrannical government, to give us the opportunity to protect ourselves and our homes.”

View post:
The politics of gunplay

05-02-2012 17:14

See the article here:
Second Amendment University - Video

30-01-2012 19:14 On October 16, 1991, George Hennard drove his 1987 Ford Ranger pickup truck through the front window of a Luby's Cafeteria at 1705 East Central Texas Expressway in Killeen, yelled "This is what Bell County has done to me!", then opened fire on the restaurant's patrons and staff with a Glock 17 pistol and later a Ruger P89. About 80 people were in the restaurant at the time. He stalked, shot, and killed 23 people and wounded another 20 before committing suicide. During the shooting, he approached Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp, a chiropractor, and her parents. Dr. Hupp had actually brought a handgun to the Luby's Cafeteria that day, but had left it in her vehicle due to the laws in force at the time, forbidding citizens from carrying firearms. Both of Dr. Hupp's parents were murdered that day.

Here is the original post:
Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp on The Second Amendment - Video

05-02-2012 13:50 TED NUGENTS VIEW ON THE SECOND AMENDENT. I THINK HE IS RIGHT ON TRACK......... WHAT DO YOU THINK ? THIS IS A MIRRORED VIDEO............

Read the original here:
A VIEW ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT - Video

SPRINGFIELD — Gun rights supporters Monday appealed a federal judge’s decision to keep intact Illinois’ ban on carrying loaded guns in public.

In documents filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Springfield, attorneys for the Second Amendment Foundation asked for a review of Judge Sue Myerscough’s ruling, in which she dismissed the organization’s challenge of the state’s one-of-a-kind ban on carrying concealed weapons.

In a 48-page decision issued Friday, Myerscough said the state’s law barring citizens from legally carrying concealed firearms doesn’t violate the U.S. Constitution because the Supreme Court has recognized the right to bear arms only within a home, not outside.

“Plaintiffs argue that the Second Amendment protects a general right to carry guns that includes a right to carry operable guns in public,” Myerscough wrote. “However, neither the United States Supreme Court nor any United States Court of Appeals has recognized such a right.

“Further, the Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home and has cautioned courts not to expand on its limited holding.”

Alan Gottlieb, executive vice president of the Bellevue, Wash.-based Second Amendment Foundation, said his group will take its fight to the nation’s high court in hopes of clarifying the law.

“The Second Amendment does not say the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except outside your home or that it only applies inside your house. We don’t check our constitutional rights at the front door,” Gottlieb said in a release.

“We’re disappointed with the decision, and we are appealing,” said attorney David Jensen, who represented Michael Moore of Champaign in the case.

The Illinois Attorney General’s office, which represented the state in the case, did not immediately return messages.

Moore and others want state lawmakers or a court to bring the state in line with the rest of the nation when it comes to carrying weapons. His lawsuit is among at least two cases winding through the federal legal system.

Last year, a concealed carry proposal fell six votes short of moving out of the Illinois House. Supporters say they may ask for another vote on the issue this spring.

See original here:
Judge squelches bid to overturn Illinois gun law

Every presidential election year, certain hot-button issues come to the forefront. This year is no different with discussions of abortion, taxes and gun control.

Lawrence, KS - infoZine - A University of Kansas law professor has authored an article arguing that in the case of Americans’ right to keep and bear arms as represented in the Second Amendment, Congress is the body that will have the most impact, not the president or Supreme Court, as is often assumed.

Stephen McAllister, professor of law, authored “Individual Rights Under a System of Dual Sovereignty: The Right to Keep and Bear Arms” for the University of Kansas Law Review. In the article, he examines the relationship between state and federal constitutions. Forty-four states currently have language in their constitutions granting individuals some right to own firearms. The Supreme Court has also recently weighed in on the matter with its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, a 2008 decision which holds that citizens have the right to own and possess typical firearms in federal enclaves. A couple of years later the Supreme Court followed up Heller by holding that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms also applies against state and local governments.

“It is an interesting question, to what degree does federal law determine what rights people have to carry guns?” McAllister said of the Supreme Court’s rulings and the reason he wrote the article. “It’s timely because the Supreme Court has finally said the Second Amendment does in fact mean something.”

From state to state, laws regarding gun ownership vary, but if any were to contradict federal law, the state laws would be superseded, or “pre-empted” by the Second Amendment. The argument of states’ rights does not win out.

“If a state law is in conflict with the U.S. Constitution, the Constitution always wins,” McAllister said. “In Heller, however, the Supreme Court went out of its way to make clear that a host of federal laws regulating firearms are valid.’”

After Heller, states generally can’t ban, but can regulate gun ownership, he said. Despite the Supreme Court’s stand, people focused on gun rights and restriction should focus more on Congress, McAllister argues. Federal legislation also trumps state legislation, and were Congress to pass any restrictions on gun ownership, states would be required to follow those restrictions.

Few federal lawmakers have chosen to focus on gun rights or restriction, but because the Supreme Court has set the level of constitutional protection relatively low, Congress has room to regulate gun ownership, when and if it chooses to do so, McAllister said. That sets the Second Amendment question apart from other often-controversial constitutional topics.

“It doesn’t often turn out this way because the Supreme Court has often set the bar fairly high to very high in cases of individual rights such as abortion and free speech,” he said.

In that regard, for example, should a state pass legislation outlawing abortion, it would be trumped by federal law, and will continue to be unless the decision in Roe v. Wade were overturned. The same is true of state laws that might attempt to punish protected speech, as occurred recently in the case of Snyder v. Phelps.

McAllister, who teaches both state and federal constitutional law classes, said it is interesting to examine how each state addresses the question of gun rights in its constitution. Some contain wording identical or nearly so to the Second Amendment regarding well-organized militias, while others are very specific in protecting the legal uses of firearms for recreation or home defense. As part of the article, McAllister compiled a table of the 44 state constitutions that address the issue and included the specific language from each. Like virtually all other controversial constitutional topics, the question of gun rights will continue to evolve, he said.

“I think short of banning typical weapons, states probably have the authority — in spite of the Second Amendment — to determine their own laws with respect to firearms, so long as those laws do not conflict with any federal statute regulating guns,” he said. “What people who are concerned about gun rights really need to focus on is Congress, not the Supreme Court. That’s where the ‘gun rights’ action will occur.”

Here is the original post:
Biggest Factor in Gun Rights, Congress, Not Courts

16-12-2011 07:48 A libertarian's view of the second amendment.

Read the original:
What is the second amendment? - Video

03-02-2012 08:28

See original here:
Second Amendment Paranoia - Video

22-01-2012 01:28 Artist: Second Amendment Song: "Wotan Rains On A Plutocrat Parade" Album: Various - The Appeal Of Discarded Orthodoxy: A Tribute To David E. Williams (2007)

View post:
Second Amendment ~ "Wotan Rains On A Plutocrat Parade" (David E. Williams cover) - Video

If you are politically conservative, like most of what the Tea Party stands for and a strong defender of the Second Amendment of the Constitution (the right to bear arms), you would have been in good company at the Yosemite Gateway Restaurant Jan. 24.

Speaking at an Oakhurst/Coarsegold Area Tea Party meeting, Sam Paredes, executive director of Gun Owners of California said his organization is recruiting Tea Party members to run for the state assembly and senate seats to regain some balance in California from the radical left.

"We know the battle is in the political trenches and victory will never be assured until the last anti-gun legislator is defeated."

Paredes and his organization, founded by 22-year California Senator H.L. Richardson (Ret.), feels there are "swing" elections in both state assembly and senate races this year. He said Gun Owners of California is recruiting Tea Party members in those districts and feels their efforts could add an additional eight to 11 Republicans to the Assembly and Senate.

"There are 62 Tea Party members currently in congress that fight hard for what they believe in," Paredes said. "We have to stick together, communicate amongst each other and continue to grow."

Protecting Second Amendment rights

Paredes, speaking before more than 100 attendees, said the primary goal of his lobbying organization is to protect and conserve citizens Second Amendment rights.

"We believe the Second Amendment to the constitution is under severe attack and must be vigorously defended," Paredes said.

He said the Constitution and Bill of Rights are priceless documents that are as valid today as when they were first drafted.

He has spoken before 83 Tea Party, Republican and Second Amendment events throughout California over the past two years.

"The overriding theme that all of these groups have in common is that they want to do something to take their state and country back," Paredes said. "These folks are motivated to do whatever it takes to elect conservatives and defeat not just radical liberals, but all liberals."

"To the radical left, everything is about control so they can exert their power over the populace," Paredes said. "They know deep down inside that they can never fully reach that goal as long as the citizens of this country and this state own guns."

He said the vast majority of Californians live in urban area such as Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego and the Bay Area.

"All those areas have virtual bans on the insurance of Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) permits," said Paredes. "Sacramento and El Dorado Counties alone issue more permits than all of the urban communities combined."

Pero impressed with Paredes

John Pero, who along with his wife Janae, serve as the Oakhurst-Coarsegold Tea Party Coordinators, arranged for Paredes to speak in Oakhurst. Jon Pero said he was impressed with Paredes' depth of knowledge of Second Amendment issues and how to fight and win in the political arena.

"Instead of just presenting gloom and doom, Sam had a very positive message," Pero said. "One key thing I came away with, was how small political victories can radically alter the political landscape. If we target the districts that will be close races this fall in California, and win over half of them, it will translate into significant more conservatives in the assembly in Sacramento and a way to stop Governor Brown and the Democrats from passing more anti business, anti second amendment, anti growth and anti family values legislation in California."

Pero said he liked how Paredes described the type of candidates that are needed in California and across the nation.

"Not the 'I'll reach across the aisle types' that just want to compromise, but the Tea Party type candidates who have passion in their bones who will aggressively fight against the liberal machine in Sacramento and in Washington, and who will not compromise their values."

It was the first time Maria Carpenter, a volunteer at Helping Hands Pregnancy & Parenting Center in Oakhurst, attended a Tea Party meeting.

"I wanted to know who is out there running for office and to learn more about them ... especially the ones being supported by the Tea Party," Carpenter said. "This is such an important election year."

She said she wants to know who is supportive of the intentions of the founding fathers who were clear that we all have inalienable rights that were given to us by our creator including freedom of speech, freedom of religion and the pursuit of happiness and what candidates support the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

"The fact that the Second Amendment was going to be discussed peeked my interest," Carpenter said.

Carpenter said she was glad she attended the meeting and liked what Paredes had to say.

"It was an excellent meeting that met my expectations and I was impressed with the organization and leadership skills of John and Janae Pero," Carpenter said. "I like being part of a grass roots effort and I hope to help out. The only time people cry out is when they are being oppressed ... and the time is now. I hope to bring a couple friends with me to the next meeting."

More than 700 members in Mountain Area Tea Party

The Oakhurst-Coarsegold Tea Party has grown from about 550 members a year ago to currently more than 700. There are 12 chapters between Mariposa and Bakersfield.

John Pero said what draws people to the Tea Party is their agreement with the party's three core values -- Constitutional limited government, free markets and fiscal responsibility.

"The Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights says the people have the right to own and carry firearms and it may not be violated, yet the government at federal, state and local levels have put unconstitutional restrictions against this right," said Pero after the meeting.

Pero said that Constitutionally limited government means just that -- limited to only what the Constitution says.

"Over the past 150 years politicians have imposed more and more regulations on businesses and individuals and stripped us of our God given and Constitutional rights. They have increasingly raised our taxes to pay for things that are unconstitutional."

Pero feels liberals and progressives say the Constitution is a living document.

"That is complete nonsense," said Pero. "The Constitution does not deal with technology, it deals with human nature. Human nature does not change. If the constitution is a 'living document.' then so is everyone's mortgage. It is a contract. It means what it says, and says what it means. When public officials take office, they swear to uphold the Constitution -- the "contract" with the United States."

Pero said it is the expansion of the government that Tea Party members are so upset with.

"They are tired of the government continually
spending more and more of our tax dollars on entitlement programs or allowing agencies like the EPA which are not subject to voters from the public, to implement regulations which cripple businesses or put the rights of a rat or frog above those of human beings," Pero said. "These types of decisions were to be left to the States and local jurisdictions, not the federal government. More and more people today are fed up with the over reach and bureaucracies of the federal, state and local governments."

Paredes feels the largest impact the Tea Party has had on national politics is the organization has shined the light on everything Congress and the president have done that is unconstitutional and have caused many to take action and speak up.

"Even the mainstream news presents the views of the Democrats, the Republican and the Tea Party, although reluctantly at times," Paredes said. "The media can not avoid it because even Republican leaders admit they are siding with the Tea Party on various issues."

Information, instructions and forms were available at the meeting for obtaining a Concealed Carry Weapons permit through the Madera County Sheriff's Department. The informational packet may be picked-up at the department's Mountain Division office in Oakhurst (559) 642-3201 or downloaded from the department's website by going to madera-county.com.

Details: gunownersca.com.

Read more from the original source:
Tea Party hosts head of Gun Owners of California