Daily Archives: May 17, 2022

The Second Amendment reads: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Most people think that this amendment was included in the Constitution to protect the right to bear arms (i.e., firearms). However, when I read Carol Andersons interesting, well-written, and very well documented book The Second, it became clear to me that this was not really the case at all.

The Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights to assure the Southern states that they would be able to continue to have militias in order to put down slave revolts and to hunt down runaway slaves.

James Madison needed to keep the Southern states in the Union and on board for ratification of the Constitution. That required acquiescence to safeguarding their ability to continue slavery. The amendments to the Constitution that make up the Bill of Rights are about individual rights; therefore, the right to have a militia could not be included there. However, a militia needed armed men, and thus, the individual right to bear arms was a means to put the right to a militia in the Constitution and keep the Southern states in the Union.

Another aspect of the Second Amendment speaks about the right of the people to bear arms. People when the Constitution was drafted meant white male citizens. Black people, enslaved or free, were not considered citizens. Immediately after the ratification of the Constitution, all states but one (Vermont) passed laws prohibiting Black people from owning and using guns, presumably to make absolutely sure that the right to bear arms was a white right, not a universal right.

Thus, the Second Amendment assured white supremacy. Anderson shows clearly in her book that, to the present day, Black individuals who legally carry a gun are treated differently from white gun carriers by law enforcement, and this not infrequently leads to the killing of African Americans who were legally carrying a gun.

The U.S. Supreme Court ignored the militia part of the one-sentence Second Amendment in the Heller vs. District of Columbia decision in 2008 when it ruled, 5 to 4, that The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. This was essentially reaffirmed in the McDonald vs. Chicago decision of the Supreme Court in 2010 (also 5 to 4). There have been no state militias in the U.S. since the National Guard was established as replacement by the Militia Act of 1903.

The consequences of the Heller and McDonald Supreme Court rulings have been devastating. Gun ownership has skyrocketed in the U.S., contributing to the significant recent rise in gun homicides and injuries, as well as to suicides by guns, gun accidents, and use of deadly force by law enforcement who are afraid of people they deal with having a gun, legally or not.

The wording of the Second Amendment does not support the notion that the intent of the original framers was to guarantee in the Constitution an individuals right to own and use guns for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Rather, as pointed out in Andersons book, the right to bear firearms was connected to the need of the Southern states to have armed militias, consisting of white men to keep Black slaves in their place.

More mass shootings have occurred while I was writing this: 10 dead and 3 wounded in Buffalo in what appears to have been a white supremacist, anti-Black act of gun violence. And in Milwaukee at least 17 people were injured in a shooting where police recovered no less than 10 guns at the scene (likely handguns).

Why are we waiting to ban all semiautomatic rifles and all handguns outside ones home for which there is no traditionally lawful purpose. Self-defense in the home, if one sees a need for that, can be accomplished with a handgun provided that it is safely stored and fitted with a trigger-lock and has a limited magazine capacity.

And there is no place in the U.S. for ghost guns that circumvent any sort of regulation, such as universal background checks, age limits, red flag laws, stolen-gun reporting requirements, and so on.

How many more people have to die in the U.S. because of the lack of common-sense gun regulation and our misinterpretation of the Second Amendment?

Maarten Bosland, a former Oak Park resident, is a member of Gun Responsibility Advocates.

Read more:
The Second Amendment revisited - Wednesday Journal

(WHTM) With one day left to make their final pitch to voters ahead of the May 17 primary general election, candidates made their way out across the state, including United States Senate candidate Carla Sands who attended a gun-rights rally.

Every day is a day for the second amendment, Sands said. Including, Sands says, the Monday after a weekend of mass shootings, including one in Buffalo, New York.

None of these tragedies trump our Second Amendment rights. We hold this right dear, along with all of our constitutional freedom, our constitutional rights, Sands said. She says the gun wasnt the problem.

The family knew, the community knew. They should have stepped in and a mental health expert should have helped and intervened in this situation, Sands said.

Democratic State Senate Leader Jay Costa says he is astonished. And to think that a Republican candidate for U.S. Senate is going to talk about gun rights on Monday, today, after the weekend after is astonishing and just simply irresponsible.

Costa says that the conversation should be focused elsewhere.

We should be talking about gun reform measures. We should be talking about the hate crimes that have spewed some of this stuff thats taken place. Thats what we should be talking about and having rallies around those types of things, Costa said.

Costas district in Pittsburg includes the Tree of Life Synagogue, which was the scene of another hate-related mass murder. And every time it happens, they have to relive it, Costa said. And its just frustrating that were going to be out there today in Mechanicsburg talking about promoting more guns.

A supporter of gun rights, and of Sands,s says times like this are exactly when you need to know which politicians support gun rights. Anthony Terrace remembers his days in the United States Air Force.

You could have a gun strapped to you. So just like I do here, and I think its not necessary in a way. But I think everybody should still have that right to carry their arms, Terrace said.

Sands is one of even Republican candidates for U.S. Senate, all strong supporters of gun rights. All four Democratic Senate candidates support more gun control, to varying degrees.

The primary election is on Tuesday, May 17. To see who is running for Pennsylvanias open U.S. Senate seat, click here.

See original here:
Astonishing or every day is a day for the second amendment? Sides spar over gun-rights rally - ABC27

In the coming days or months, the Supreme Court will rule on one of the most important gun cases in the high courts history. The case addresses whether gun owners have a constitutional right to carry their arms outside their homes and, if so, whether restrictive concealed carry licensing laws violate the Second Amendment. Law professor and Brennan Center Fellow Eric Ruben discusses the case and its implications.

Ruben: Brueninvolves a New York State law limiting who can carry a concealed handgun in public. For more than a century, New Yorkers wanting a license to carry a concealed handgun for self-defense have needed to show that they have what the law calls proper cause basically a greater need for self-protection than others in the community. A judge determined that the plaintiffs inBruendid not satisfy that standard. They both received concealed carry licenses, but they were restricted in terms of where they could carry their handguns. For example, one plaintiff wasissued a licenseto carry a concealed handgun while traveling to and from work, and both plaintiffs licenses permitted them to carry concealed handguns for hunting, target practice, and in certain areas not frequented by the general public.

Along with the National Rifle Associations New York affiliate, the plaintiffs sued, contending that the limitations placed on their licenses violate the Second Amendment. They argue that the Second Amendment protects their right to carry a handgun virtuallywhenever and whereverthe need for self-defense might arise.

For more analysis on gun rights and regulations, check out the Brennan Centers Protests, Insurrection, and the Second Amendment series.

Ruben: InHeller, a bare majority of the justices struck down Washington, D.C.s ban on handguns in the home. The Supreme Court held, for the first time in over 200years, that the Second Amendment protects an individuals right to keep and bear arms centered, not around a well regulated Militia, but rather, around the inherent right of self-defense.

Hellerwas a landmark case, constitutionalizing a vast policy area the regulation of weapons. That said, the law at issue was an outlier because only two major cities in the country, DC and Chicago, had such a handgun ban.

The law challenged inBruen, in contrast, affectsa lotmore people than the handgun ban at issue inHeller. New York isone of eight heavily populated statesrequiring that people seeking to carry a concealed handgun have a heightened need to do so. If the high court strikes down New Yorks law, it will have immediate implications in these states home to roughly one-quarter of Americans.

Moreover, the impact on people in these states arguably will be more significant than the impact ofHelleron people living in DC and Chicago.Hellerruled on the right to have a gun in ones own home. If the Supreme Court rules that proper-cause laws are unconstitutional, residents of these eight states can expect to interact with more people armed with a deadly weapon. Gun rights advocatessaythat is a good thing for society that an armed society is a polite society but others, including the weight of scholarship,suggestotherwise.

Ruben: Of course, Ill be watching for the ruling on proper-cause permitting laws. The Supreme Court could uphold New Yorks law, but after oral arguments many court watchersthinkthat is unlikely. The Court could also strike down the challenged aspect of the law, the proper cause requirement, which would keep in place licensing, but remove most of its teeth. Another possibility is a middle-ground ruling. For example, at oral argument, the plaintiffs attorney said that his clients had no intention of going into New York City with their handguns. The justices could use that concession to limit their ruling to non-urban places.

Another thing Ill watch for is whether the Court uses this opportunity toannouncenew Second Amendment doctrine, such as a judicial test deeming modern gun violence irrelevant and history and tradition paramount. That would be highly consequential because it would affect the Second Amendment analysis ofallchallenged weapons laws, not just proper-cause restrictions.

AfterHeller, the lower courts have decided over 1,000Second Amendment cases about everything from felon-in-possession prohibitions to assault-weapon bans. In doing so, they have applied a conventional approach that considers, among other things, modern public safety concerns. If a majority of the justices decide that Second Amendment cases should be resolved solely on the basis of text and history, not modern safety, we can expect a new round of litigation challenging laws previously upheld under the conventional approach.

Ruben: The second-class right trope has become increasingly common in some circles and may feature in the Courts opinions. In a recent study, Joseph Blocher and I foundno strong empirical supportfor the allegation of widespread mistreatment of gun rights in the courts. Among other things, the success rate of Second Amendment claims isconsistent with that in other constitutional contexts.

But the contention of second-class treatment, which has anunmistakably partisan cast in court opinions, could nonetheless have a profound impact. If a majority of the justices come to accept the second-class claim, that could rationalize a decision to bolster judicial scrutiny of gun laws and further limit the ability of governments to regulate in this area.

Ruben: Policymakers will probably adapt to the changed circumstances and seek out alternative routes for regulation. I have a forthcomingessayin the Harvard Law Review Forum about how criminal laws governing gunuse, as opposed to guncarrying, provide incentives and disincentives for public carry through mechanisms like sentence enhancements, self-defense elements, burdens of proof, and legal inferences. If the Supreme Court strikes down New Yorks proper cause requirement, one avenue for regulation might be blocked, but that would merely redirect policymakers down other avenues.

Go here to read the rest:
A Right to Conceal and Carry? - brennancenter.org

Tennessees 112th General Assembly adjourned last month with special interest groups giving lawmakers starkly different grades when it comes to addressing gun issues.

Tennessee Moms Demand Action and Students Demand Action, two grassroots volunteer organizations working to end gun violence and lax gun laws, issued a joint statement praising legislators for concluding the two-year session without advancing a single gun lobby priority.

Linda McFadyen-Ketchum, a volunteer with the Tennessee chapter of Moms Demand Action, said in a news release: Were thrilled to be celebrating a session with no bad gun bills passed, but we know far more needs to be done to make our state safe from gun violence.

Meanwhile, officials with the Tennessee Firearms Association decried what it called the Republican supermajority in the General Assemblys absolute failure on Second Amendment issues in 2022.

John Harris, the executive director of the TFA, said in a news release issued after lawmakers adjourned in April that his gun owner rights organization had tracked more than 50 bills this year.

He said only a portion of those bills were truly strong pro-Second Amendment legislation and none of the really strong ones even got a floor vote in both houses or in most instances in either house.

Top stories, delivered straight to your inbox.

Harris said with the failure of the GOP leadership to pass key gun laws this year, he concludes that Gov. Bill Lee is not a strong Second Amendment supporter and Republicans in both chambers played a role in killing pro-gun legislation

One might conclude that there is, however, a significant and perhaps growing number of Republican legislators who are truly Second Amendment supporters, Harris noted in his statement last month. You see this not necessarily in the bills that are sponsored, but as evidenced by their willingness to argue for these bills in subcommittees, committees and on the floor when the opportunities arise. It is critical going forward to 2023 and beyond that those true advocates be joined with new legislators who are true stewards of our rights.

McFadyen-Ketchum said Moms Demand Action hopes to build upon this years success on Capitol Hill.

We will take this momentum right back into the fight as we continue to urge lawmakers to prioritize public safety beyond the legislative session, she said.

She said hers and other gun safety organizations will be pointing out to state legislators the correlation between Tennessees 32nd ranking for the strength of the its gun laws and statistics that show in an average year, 1,273 people die by guns in Tennessee.

{p class=p3}Gun safety advocates say they lobbied heavily this year to derail passage of a number of harmful gun bills, including HB1735, which would have lowered the age requirement for carrying a concealed, loaded handgun in public from 21 to 18, and HB2554, which would have allowed people with enhanced carry permits to carry firearms in all places at all times with limited exceptions.

Recommended Videos

Follow this link:
Legislative session was a stark tale of two differing views on gun laws - Johnson City Press (subscription)

McGraw High School Clay Target League Trap Team. (Photo Source: NRA Foundation & McGraw Clay Target Team).

Press release from the NRA Foundation.

The NRA Foundation has awarded the McGraw High School Clay Target League Team a grant valued at $400 in the form of five cases of ammunition to benefit the team. We are thrilled to be recipients of another grant, said the coaches. Securing ammunition for our team is fundamental to our success, and we are truly grateful for the support of the NRA.

The students happily accepted the granted ammunition. They are in the midst of their third season, currently ranking in the top of Conference 2A against eight other high schools. Seventeen students are expected to compete in the 2022 New York State High School Clay Target League State Tournament in Bridgeport, NY for Trap which will be held on June 27, 2022. McGraw School also expects to have several individuals and hopefully a team represented at the USA High School Clay Target League National Championship in Michigan.

The Clay Target team is an extremely popular extra-curricular in our high school, says Melinda McCool, Superintendent of Schools. We are very grateful to the NRA for the support of our team. As an avid hunter, I am pleased with the efforts of our coaches and parents to encourage our children to participate safely and with respect.

Established in 1871, the National Rifle Association is Americas oldest civil rights and sportsmens group. Five million members strong, NRA continues its mission to uphold Second Amendment rights and is the leader in firearm education and training for law-abiding gun owners, law enforcement and the military. Visit nra.org.

Established in 1990, The NRA Foundation, Inc. is a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization that raises tax-deductible contributions in support of a wide range of firearm-related public interest activities of the National Rifle Association of America and other organizations that defend and foster the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Americans. These activities are designed to promote firearm and hunting safety, to enhance marksmanship skills of those participating in the shootings sports, and to educate the general public about firearms in their historic, technological, and artistic context. More information about The NRA Foundation can be found online at http://www.nrafoundation.org.

Friends of NRA is a grassroots fund-raising program that fosters community involvement to organize and, with help from NRA field staff, plan community events for firearms enthusiasts. All net proceeds from Friends of NRA events are allocated to The NRA Foundation, the leading charitable organization in support of the shooting sports. Through NRA Foundation grants for equipment, training materials, range improvements, and more, qualified local, state, and national programs receive aid to involve and inspire a new generation of competitive shooters. Learn more about Friends of NRA at http://www.friendsofnra.org.

See the original post here:
The NRA Foundation Awards 2022 State Fund Grant to the McGraw High School Clay Target League Team - Cortland Voice

To The REVIEW:

It is with great enthusiasm that I endorse Rep. Skyler Wheeler in the June primary and the general election.

As a 20-year veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps, I know what effective leadership looks like, and I have observed Rep. Wheeler become one of the strongest and most consistent conservative voices in the Iowa House. His leadership has been vital in the passage of key pieces of legislation in support of our common-sense, foundational values.

Rep. Wheeler was a major voice in the passage of the Heartbeat Bill, which at the time of its passage was the strongest protection in the nation for our unborn children. He was also instrumental in the passage of other pieces of pro-life legislation, including the 24-hour waiting period, and most recently the Life Amendment to reverse the egregious Cady Court ruling that placed a fundamental right to abortion in the Iowa Constitution.

A strong advocate for the Second Amendment, Rep. Wheeler has been a leading voice in the passage of numerous Second Amendment initiatives, including protections for gun manufacturers against frivolous lawsuits intended to put them out of business, Constitutional Carry, and the Freedom Amendment, which when passed will add the right to keep and bear arms to the Iowa Constitution.

Rep. Wheeler stood with me as I worked to pass legislation to ban sanctuary cities in Iowa. He has been a strong voice for religious freedom. In every major fight for the advancement of our foundational values, Rep. Wheeler was and is in the thick of it, and his influence in the House Republican caucus is strong.

In the current legislative session, Rep. Wheeler led the fight to protect womens sports in Iowa. It was his tenacity, over a several-year period, which led to the enactment of these important protections into law.

Rep. Wheeler is one of the strongest and most steadfast conservative leaders in the Iowa House, and his integrity is without question. I respectfully and enthusiastically ask that he be supported in the primary and the general election. His courage and determination are vital to our continued success in the Iowa House.

Rep. Steven Holt,

Iowa House District 18,

Denison

Excerpt from:
Letter: Wheeler is vital to success in House - nwestiowa.com

With new language added, cryptocurrency, homeless aid measures stir differences between Senate, House

The NH Senate and House are controlled by the same party, but that wasnt what it sounded like as initial committees of conference tried to work out their different versions of bills passed by each body.

Of course, there were many times on Monday when both sides could agree on several bills. Both sides compromised on bills about PFAS remediation and easing up on small hazardous waste generators (House Bill 1547), establishing a Medicaid dental benefit (HB 103), giving day care centers that are being investigated more of a fair shake (HB 230) and a bill giving hospital patients the right to designated a loved one to visit (HB 1439).

But then there was HB 1503, amended by the Senate to include language to support an old industry steel in a bill that seeks to promote an up-and-coming industry cryptocurrency. The House bill would update the Uniform Commercial Code, relative to exempting the exchange of open blockchain tokens from certain securities laws.

Rep. John Hunt, R-Rindge, said at the conference committee that it was offensive to add language to a bill that would require the state ot only use U.S. steel for large contracts, since it could raise the prices of state contracts.

The House had previously passed the steel bill Senate Bill 438 but then attached the language of HB 1171, a bill that would have eased cosmetology licensing requirements that the Senate sent to study at the end of last month.

If we start pointing fingers at each other, its important to realize that the Senate didnt fire the first shot, Sen. Sharon Carson. R-Londonderry. What do you want to do? Do you want us to walk away?

Hunt said that the cryptocurrency bill would eventually pass, so if the Senate wants to fall on its sword (when) here we have this golden opportunity and to put in a taxpayer subsidy to an old industry is not appropriate. It opens up a can of worms.

If it opens up a can of worms, we will take them as we get them, Carson replied. We have companies that manufacture steel here, and they provide good-paying jobs. We are protecting those business and keeping those people working.

While both sides talked vaguely about setting up another conference committee, as of Tuesday morning nothing was scheduled, and that wasnt a good sign for the measure. Conferees have until Thursday to sign off on all bills.

Homeless funding

Similarly, the Senates attempt to load the language of three other bills onto HB 1662 which deals with privacy obligations at the state Department of Health and Human Services seemed to be going nowhere at the conference on Monday.

One of the Senate amendments would have added $5 million in funding to aid the homeless, but the Senate conferees added a twist: The money would go to the towns based on Medicaid enrollment rather than homeless shelters.

There were two arguments behind the change: lots of homeless people dont reach the states shelters which combined have space for 965 people. Estimates of the number of homeless people in the state range between 1,500 and 4,000.

Second, it might be a better use of the states resources to prevent homelessness rather than just shelter people. House members were intrigued by the idea but rejected it for several reasons: It was not part of the budget process; it would be hard for each town to figure out how to spend the money; and it wasnt in the original language of either version of the bill.

The second amendment formerly SB 209 would have allowed employers to pay workers electronically, even if the employee would rather get a paper check. This wasnt the way the debate was framed by either side. Carson presented it as a way to give employees more options, including a debit card.

We are so far behind the times, said Carson, arguing that this is the way the state distributes welfare benefits. Only private employers are mired in a system suited to the 1940s. Its time we joined the modern age.

But House members were concerned about some of the safeguards the Senate put in to protect workers when it comes to debit cards. ;They shall be liable for late payment of wages whenever the replacement wages are provided after the designated payday, quoted Leonard Turcotte, R-Barrington. Really?

The House conferees biggest objection is the requirement that an employer would have to replace a lost, stolen or damaged card within 24 hours of being notified. What if this should happen over the weekend? Turcotte asked. He said the law should simply say the employer should inform the worker how he or she is to be paid and pay them that way.

The third add-on to HB 1662 was the language of SB 355, which would require that large online marketplaces that handle transactions themselves, such as Amazon and eBay, have to disclose sales of high volumes of merchandise. The bill, strongly supported by the NH Retail Association, would help law enforcement agencies track down criminal operations that buy up stolen merchandise from brick-and-mortar stores and dispose of it online.

House members continued to oppose including the language. Nonetheless they agreed to continue negotiations at 3 p.m. Tuesday.

Go here to read the rest:
Key bills seem headed to oblivion with conference committees at loggerheads - New Hampshire Business Review