It isn’t enough to just support the Second Amendment. The rest of those amendments are there for a reason as well.
I’ve been a long time believer in the idea of my rights stop at any others person’s nose. Sort of don’t infringe on my rights and I won’t infringe on yours.
Unfortunately both political parties seem to make their whole justification for existence based on appealing to people’s desire to infringe on the rights of others.
Back in the 1920s we had Prohibition. It put a lot of people in jail and failed utterly. Since the 1970s we have had the war on drugs which has also put a lot of people in jail and been an epic fail when it comes to ending drug usage.
Places like Chicago and Washington DC which have the strictest anti-gun laws seem to have the most gun crime.
Several Amendments to the Constitution deal with warrants for searches, rights to not self incriminate and no prior restraint as well as a right to face one’s accusers and have a trial by jury.
When it first happened back about 10 tears ago or so a lot of us thought it was funny when certain politicians found themselves on the “No Fly” list. It wasn’t funny. It illustrated how easy it was for listing parties to put someone there out of spite or by error.
I think we are correct in opposing the use of this list as something to deny people their rights, all their rights including those mentioned above.
By Roger J. Katz, Attoney at Law and Stephen L. D’Andrilli
June 22, 2016
New York, NY -(Ammoland.com)- “Someone must have been telling lies about Josef K., he knew he had done nothing wrong but, one morning, he was arrested. . . . But even that is all beside the point, the main question is: Who is issuing the indictment?” “The Trial,” a novel by Franz Kafka, published in 1925
Who is issuing the indictment, indeed? Unlike Josef K., the protagonist, in Franz Kafka’s insightful allegory, we, Americans, don’t live in a dictatorship. But, is that true? Was that statement once true, but true no longer?
How is it that, “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union. . .” has devolved into “We the Government of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union. . . . ?”
The phrases—“insure domestic Tranquility,” “provide for the common defense,” “promote the general Welfare”—are lost in time.
The federal Government and the media circus subsume these phrases, appearing in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution, under the ubiquitous, deceptive expression, “national security”—an expression that appears nowhere in it.
What hath this Government in the name of “We the People” wrought for the People.
Understand: Nothing—absolutely nothing—Congress, or the United States President, or the President’s legions of bureaucrats do is more invidious and insidious than disemboweling and dismembering the Bill of Rights in the name of national security. We should not excuse or laud emotional trumpet calls for action before pondering the legality and ethical merits of such Government action. We should not excuse or laud emotional trumpet calls for action before considering their impact on our free Republic. We should not excuse or laud emotional trumpet calls for action before recognizing their cost—the possible loss of our precious rights and liberties. For, once lost, they’re lost forever.
When emotions run high, restraint is required. The denial of gun sales to anyone whose name appears on the Government’s “terror watch list” is a recent proposal bubbling to the surface as a result of the recent carnage wrought by a home-grown self-radicalized Islamic terrorist. On Monday, June 20, 2016, the U.S. Senate voted on a measure that would do just that: preclude a person from purchasing a firearm if his or her name appears on the Government’s “terror watch list.” Fortunately, sane heads prevailed and the measure was voted down.
Secret Government lists, such as the “terror watch list” and the “no fly list,”—and perhaps others, of which we are unaware—are problematic in a free, democratic Republic.
For, once an American’s name appears on a secret government watch list, his or her rights and liberties, guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution, are in jeopardy. More to the point, such lists enable the federal Government to deny an American citizen his or her rights and liberties absent any charge of criminal wrong-doing. The Government, at the stroke of a pen, denies a person his or her rights and liberties without notice, without hearing, without reasonable means to challenge the inclusion of their name, in open court.
Understand, we aren’t saying or suggesting those who seek to harm innocent Americans should have access to firearms. And, those Senators who voted down the “terror watch list” measure, on June 20, 2016, aren’t tacitly suggesting that American citizens who seek to harm innocent Americans should have access to firearms. These U.S. Senators have obviously asked themselves—and we need ask ourselves too—this profound question:
Continue reading at: http://www.ammoland.com/2016/06/terror-watch-list-good-idea-gone-bad-bad-idea-along/