Cyborg | Designer-Babies | Futurism | Futurist | Immortality | Longevity | Nanotechnology | Post-Human | Singularity | Transhuman

Second Amendment | United States Constitution | Britannica.com

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Second Amendment | United States Constitution | Britannica.com
Sep 022015
 

Second Amendment,Second AmendmentNARAamendment to the Constitution of the United States, adopted in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights, that provided a constitutional check on congressional power under Article I Section 8 to organize, arm, and discipline the federal militia. 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. Referred to in modern times as an individuals right to carry and use arms for self-defense, the Second Amendment was envisioned by the framers of the Constitution, according to College of William and Mary law professor and future U.S. District Court judge St. George Tucker in 1803 in his great work Blackstones Commentaries: With Notes of Reference to the Constitution and Laws of the Federal Government of the United States and of the Commonwealth of Virginia, as the true palladium of liberty. In addition to checking federal power, the Second Amendment also provided state governments with what Luther Martin (1744/481826) described as the last coup de grace that would enable the states to thwart and oppose the general government. Last, it enshrined the ancient Florentine and Roman constitutional principle of civil and military virtue by making every citizen a soldier and every soldier a citizen. (See also gun control.)

Until 2008 the Supreme Court of the United States had never seriously considered the constitutional scope of the Second Amendment. In its first hearing on the subject, in Presser v. Illinois (1886), the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment prevented the states from prohibit[ing] the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security. More than four decades later, in United States v. Schwimmer (1929), the Supreme Court cited the Second Amendment as enshrining that the duty of individuals to defend our government against all enemies whenever necessity arises is a fundamental principle of the Constitution and holding that the common defense was one of the purposes for which the people ordained and established the Constitution. Meanwhile, in United States v. Miller (1939), in a prosecution under the National Firearms Act (1934), the Supreme Court avoided addressing the constitutional scope of the Second Amendment by merely holding that the possession or use of a shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length was not any part of the ordinary military equipment protected by the Second Amendment.

For more than seven decades after the United States v. Miller decision, what right to bear arms that the Second Amendment protected remained uncertain. This uncertainty was ended, however, in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), in which the Supreme Court examined the Second Amendment in exacting detail. In a narrow 54 majority, delivered by Antonin Scalia, the Supreme Court held that self-defense was the central component of the amendment and that the District of Columbias prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense to be unconstitutional. The Supreme Court also affirmed previous rulings that the Second Amendment ensured the right of individuals to take part in the defending of their liberties by taking up arms in an organized militia. However, the court was clear to emphasize that an individuals right to an organized militia is not the sole institutional beneficiary of the Second Amendments guarantee.

Because the Heller ruling constrained only federal regulations against the right of armed self-defense in the home, it was unclear whether the court would hold that the Second Amendment guarantees established in Heller were equally applicable to the states. The Supreme Court answered this question in 2010, with its ruling on McDonald v. Chicago. In a plurality opinion, a 54 majority held that the Heller right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendments due process clause.

However, despite the use of person in the Fourteenth Amendments due process clause, the McDonald plurality opinion did not extend to noncitizens. Clarence Thomass fifth and decisive vote only extended the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller to citizens. Thomas wrote, Because this case does not involve a claim brought by a noncitizen, I express no view on the difference, if any, between my conclusion and the plurality with respect to the extent to which States may regulate firearm possession by noncitizens. Thomas further came to this conclusion because he thought the Second Amendment should be incorporated through the Fourteenth Amendments privileges or immunities clause, which only recognizes the rights of citizens.

The relatively narrow holdings in the McDonald and Heller decisions left many Second Amendment legal issues unsettled, including the constitutionality of many federal gun-control regulations, whether the right to carry or conceal a weapon in public was protected, and whether noncitizens are protected through the equal protection clause.

The origins of the Second Amendment can be traced to ancient Roman and Florentine times, but its English origins developed in the late 16th century when Queen Elizabeth I instituted a national militia where individuals of all classes were required by law to take part in defending the realm. Although Elizabeths attempt to establish a national militia failed miserably, the ideology of the militia would be used as a political tool up to the mid-18th century. The political debate over the establishment and control of the militia was a contributing factor in both the English Civil Wars (164251) and the Glorious Revolution (168889).

Despite recognition in the early 21st century by the Supreme Court that the Second Amendment protected armed individual self-defense in the home, many constitutional historians disagreed with the court that the Second Amendment protected anything but the right to participate in a militia force as the means of defending their liberties. For over two centuries there was a consensus that the Second Amendment protected only the right of individuals to keep and bear Arms in order to take part in defending their liberties as a militia force. However, by the late 20th century the popular consensus had shifted, many believing that the Second Amendment was framed to protect armed self-defense in the home.

In England, following the Glorious Revolution, the Second Amendments predecessor was codified in the British Bill of Rights in 1689, under its Article VII, which proclaimed that the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law. Often misinterpreted as a right to defend ones person, home, or property, the allowance to have arms ensured that Parliament could exercise its sovereign right of self-preservation against a tyrannical crown by arming qualified Protestants as a militia.

The framers of the U.S. Constitution undoubtedly had in mind the English allowance to have arms when drafting the Second Amendment. The constitutional significance of a well regulated Militia is well documented in English and American history from the late 17th century through the American Revolution; it was included in the Articles of Confederation (1781), the countrys first constitution, and was even noted at the Constitutional Convention that drafted the new U.S. Constitution in Philadelphia in 1787. The right to keep and bear Arms was thus included as a means to accomplish the objective of a well regulated Militiato provide for the defense of the nation, to provide a well-trained and disciplined force to check federal tyranny, and to bring constitutional balance by distributing the power of the sword equally among the people, the states, and the federal government.

Read more:
Second Amendment | United States Constitution | Britannica.com

Second Amendment March

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Second Amendment March
Aug 102015
 

Second Amendment March was founded in 2009 for the purpose of organizing a nationwide pro-Second Amendment Rally in Washington, D.C. The original event took place in 2010.Since that event we have focused on Michigan events, working in conjunction with Michigan’s largest gun rights organizations.

What:A peaceful gatheringto demonstrate the political strength of Michigan’s legal gun owners and Second Amendment advocates

When:Wednesday, April 29 2015 from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

Where:Lansing State Capitol lawn

The Details:

Michigan’s Second Amendment March will be held on Wednesday, April 29th at Michigan’s Capitol.The event will begin at 10:00 a.m. on the Capitol lawn. Unlike previous years, the actual march part of the event will be around the Capitol Building and it will be midway through the event. Legislature is in session that day. We’ll be showing them the political strength of Michigan’s legal gun owners. The march is being organized by Skip Coryell’s Second Amendment March and jointly promoted and funded by the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners, Michigan Open Carry, and Michigan Gun Owners. Please visit our Facebook event page for the most updated information.

Go here to read the rest:
Second Amendment March

So You Think You Know the Second Amendment? – The New Yorker

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on So You Think You Know the Second Amendment? – The New Yorker
Jul 222015
 

Does the Second Amendment prevent Congress from passing gun-control laws? The question, which is suddenly pressing, in light of the reaction to the school massacre in Newtown, is rooted in politics as much as law.

For more than a hundred years, the answer was clear, even if the words of the amendment itself were not. The text of the amendment is divided into two clauses and is, as a whole, ungrammatical: 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. The courts had found that the first part, the militia clause, trumped the second part, the bear arms clause. In other words, according to the Supreme Court, and the lower courts as well, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear armsbut did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon.

Enter the modern National Rifle Association. Before the nineteen-seventies, the N.R.A. had been devoted mostly to non-political issues, like gun safety. But a coup dtat at the groups annual convention in 1977 brought a group of committed political conservatives to poweras part of the leading edge of the new, more rightward-leaning Republican Party. (Jill Lepore recounted this history in a recent piece for The New Yorker.) The new group pushed for a novel interpretation of the Second Amendment, one that gave individuals, not just militias, the right to bear arms. It was an uphill struggle. At first, their views were widely scorned. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, who was no liberal, mocked the individual-rights theory of the amendment as a fraud.

But the N.R.A. kept pushingand theres a lesson here. Conservatives often embrace originalism, the idea that the meaning of the Constitution was fixed when it was ratified, in 1787. They mock the so-called liberal idea of a living constitution, whose meaning changes with the values of the country at large. But there is no better example of the living Constitution than the conservative re-casting of the Second Amendment in the last few decades of the twentieth century. (Reva Siegel, of Yale Law School, elaborates on this point in a brilliant article.)

The re-interpretation of the Second Amendment was an elaborate and brilliantly executed political operation, inside and outside of government. Ronald Reagans election in 1980 brought a gun-rights enthusiast to the White House. At the same time, Orrin Hatch, the Utah Republican, became chairman of an important subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and he commissioned a report that claimed to find clearand long lostproof that the second amendment to our Constitution was intended as an individual right of the American citizen to keep and carry arms in a peaceful manner, for protection of himself, his family, and his freedoms. The N.R.A. began commissioning academic studies aimed at proving the same conclusion. An outr constitutional theory, rejected even by the establishment of the Republican Party, evolved, through brute political force, into the conservative conventional wisdom.

And so, eventually, this theory became the law of the land. In District of Columbia v. Heller, decided in 2008, the Supreme Court embraced the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment. It was a triumph above all for Justice Antonin Scalia, the author of the opinion, but it required him to craft a thoroughly political compromise. In the eighteenth century, militias were proto-military operations, and their members had to obtain the best military hardware of the day. But Scalia could not create, in the twenty-first century, an individual right to contemporary military weaponslike tanks and Stinger missiles. In light of this, Scalia conjured a rule that said D.C. could not ban handguns because handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home, and a complete prohibition of their use is invalid.

So the government cannot ban handguns, but it can ban other weaponslike, say, an assault rifleor so it appears. The full meaning of the courts Heller opinion is still up for grabs. But it is clear that the scope of the Second Amendment will be determined as much by politics as by the law. The courts will respond to public pressureas they did by moving to the right on gun control in the last thirty years. And if legislators, responding to their constituents, sense a mandate for new restrictions on guns, the courts will find a way to uphold them. The battle over gun control is not just one of individual votes in Congress, but of a continuing clash of ideas, backed by political power. In other words, the law of the Second Amendment is not settled; no law, not even the Constitution, ever is.

Photograph by Mario Tama/Getty.

Sign up for the daily newsletter.Sign up for the daily newsletter: the best of The New Yorker every day.

Read more:
So You Think You Know the Second Amendment? – The New Yorker

Second Amendment | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia …

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Second Amendment | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia …
May 282015
 

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution 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.” Such language has created considerable debate regarding the Amendment’s intended scope. On the one hand, some believe that the Amendment’s phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” creates an individual constitutional right for citizens of the United States. Under this “individual right theory,” the United States Constitution restricts legislative bodies from prohibiting firearm possession, or at the very least, the Amendment renders prohibitory and restrictive regulation presumptively unconstitutional. On the other hand, some scholars point to the prefatory language “a well regulated Militia” to argue that the Framers intended only to restrict Congress from legislating away a state’s right to self-defense. Scholars have come to call this theory “the collective rights theory.” A collective rights theory of the Second Amendment asserts that citizens do not have an individual right to possess guns and that local, state, and federal legislative bodies therefore possess the authority to regulate firearms without implicating a constitutional right.

In 1939 the U.S. Supreme Court considered the matter in United States v. Miller. 307 U.S. 174. The Court adopted a collective rights approach in this case, determining that Congress could regulate a sawed-off shotgun that had moved in interstate commerce under the National Firearms Act of 1934 because the evidence did not suggest that the shotgun “has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated milita . . . .” The Court then explained that the Framers included the Second Amendment to ensure the effectiveness of the military.

This precedent stood for nearly 70 years when in 2008 the U.S. Supreme Court revisited the issue in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290). The plaintiff in Heller challenged the constitutionality of the Washington D.C. handgun ban, a statute that had stood for 32 years. Many considered the statute the most stringent in the nation. In a 5-4 decision, the Court, meticulously detailing the history and tradition of the Second Amendment at the time of the Constitutional Convention, proclaimed that the Second Amendment established an individual right for U.S. citizens to possess firearms and struck down the D.C. handgun ban as violative of that right. The majority carved out Miller as an exception to the general rule that Americans may possess firearms, claiming that law-abiding citizens cannot use sawed-off shotguns for any law-abiding purpose. Similarly, the Court in its dicta found regulations of similar weaponry that cannot be used for law-abiding purposes as laws that would not implicate the Second Amendment. Further, the Court suggested that the United States Constitution would not disallow regulations prohibiting criminals and the mentally ill from firearm possession.

Thus, the Supreme Court has revitalized the Second Amendment. The Court continued to strengthen the Second Amendment through the 2010 decision inMcDonald v. City of Chicago(08-1521). The plaintiff inMcDonaldchallenged the constitutionally of the Chicago handgun ban, which prohibited handgun possession by almost all private citizens. In a 5-4 decisions, the Court, citing the intentions of the framers and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment, held that the Second Amendment applies to the states through theincorporation doctrine.However, the Court did not have a majority on which clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the fundamental right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense. While Justice Alito and his supporters looked to the Due Process Clause, Justice Thomas in his concurrence stated that the Privileges and Immunities Clause should justify incorporation.

However, several questions still remain unanswered, such as whether regulations less stringent than the D.C. statute implicate the Second Amendment, whether lower courts will apply their dicta regarding permissible restrictions, andwhat level of scrutiny the courts should apply when analyzing a statute that infringes on the Second Amendment.

Recent case law since Heller suggests that courts are willing to, for example, uphold

See constitutional amendment.

Read the original here:
Second Amendment | Wex Legal Dictionary / Encyclopedia …

PASTOR SAYS BLACKS NEED TO GET GUNS AND FIGHT BACK – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on PASTOR SAYS BLACKS NEED TO GET GUNS AND FIGHT BACK – Video
Apr 142015
 



PASTOR SAYS BLACKS NEED TO GET GUNS AND FIGHT BACK
A Christian Pastor in the wake of the murder of Walter Scott, says that nonviolence does not work in today society, and that black people need to use their second amendment right of getting…

By: The Jedi

More here:
PASTOR SAYS BLACKS NEED TO GET GUNS AND FIGHT BACK – Video

The Death of the Second Amendment – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on The Death of the Second Amendment – Video
Apr 122015
 



The Death of the Second Amendment
Much easier to arrest law abiding citizens then criminals. Tough NJ Gun Laws Seen Entrapping Legal Gun Owners New Jersey's strict gun laws are leading to the arrest and in some cases incarceration …

By: Dave Flang

Originally posted here:
The Death of the Second Amendment – Video

1st & 2nd Amendment Attack Caught On Camera Cop Kicks Down Second Amendment Sign – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on 1st & 2nd Amendment Attack Caught On Camera Cop Kicks Down Second Amendment Sign – Video
Apr 122015
 



1st 2nd Amendment Attack Caught On Camera Cop Kicks Down Second Amendment Sign
Please click subscribe button if you want more video. Thanks For Watching, Sharing Subscribe https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCuiuLVgKgh3roWS…

By: News Tube

Excerpt from:
1st & 2nd Amendment Attack Caught On Camera Cop Kicks Down Second Amendment Sign – Video

Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense – Video
Apr 122015
 



Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense
Donald Rumsfeld talks about the NRA show, his guns and the Second Amendment.

By: GunsAmerica

Read more:
Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense – Video

Reconsidering Charlie Hebdo – Free Speech, Offense, and Violence in Context – Video

 Free Speech  Comments Off on Reconsidering Charlie Hebdo – Free Speech, Offense, and Violence in Context – Video
Apr 122015
 



Reconsidering Charlie Hebdo – Free Speech, Offense, and Violence in Context
This is the second of a new series of community-focused lectures, discussions, and dialogues, the “Reconsidering. . . .” series. This particular discussion focused on the events, conflicts,…

By: Gregory B. Sadler

Read more:
Reconsidering Charlie Hebdo – Free Speech, Offense, and Violence in Context – Video

VIDEO – Second Amendment Victory – Car Hijacking Stopped by Armed Bystander in Georgia – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on VIDEO – Second Amendment Victory – Car Hijacking Stopped by Armed Bystander in Georgia – Video
Apr 112015
 



VIDEO – Second Amendment Victory – Car Hijacking Stopped by Armed Bystander in Georgia
It seemed like something out of an action movie: a brazen crime, quickly thwarted by an armed city employee who just happened to be on the scene. Oh my god, I've never seen nothing like…

By: BetterUpMedia

Link:
VIDEO – Second Amendment Victory – Car Hijacking Stopped by Armed Bystander in Georgia – Video

Some Conservative Lawmakers Working To Roll Back Gun Restrictions – Second Amendment – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Some Conservative Lawmakers Working To Roll Back Gun Restrictions – Second Amendment – Video
Apr 112015
 



Some Conservative Lawmakers Working To Roll Back Gun Restrictions – Second Amendment
Some Conservative Lawmakers Working To Roll Back Gun Restrictions – Second Amendment – America's newsroom =========================================== **Please Click Below to …

By: Mass Tea Party

Read more:
Some Conservative Lawmakers Working To Roll Back Gun Restrictions – Second Amendment – Video

GOP hopefuls flock to NRA cattle call

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on GOP hopefuls flock to NRA cattle call
Apr 112015
 

Updated at 6:15 p.m.

Nearly all of the 2016 GOP presidential hopefuls wereonstage Friday attheNational Rifle Association’s annual leadership conference in Nashville, a GOP cattle-call of sortsthat gavethepotential candidates a chance to trumpet their Second Amendment bona fides.

Attendees heardfrom a majority of the GOP’s first- and second-tier presidential primary contenders, former Florida governor Jeb Bush, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, Indiana Governor Mike Pence, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, former Texas governor Rick Perry, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum, Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson and businessman Donald Trump.

Notable absences? Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, both of whom have a prickly relationship with the NRA and were not invited to attend — Paul because of his affiliation with another gun-rights group and Christie who scores low on the NRA’s scorecard. Paul told Bloomberg that it was the group’s loss, not his: “To not be invited, probably, will serve more to cast aspersions on their group than it would on me. Because my record’s pretty clear. It probably looks a little bit petty for them not to invite a major candidate because I raised money for other Second Amendment groups.”

For those candidates who made the cut, today wasa critical campaign stop. The Post’s David A. Fahrenthold reported on the role of gun rights in the GOP last month:

Even for those who dont own [guns],they are a bellwether of individual liberty, a symbol of what big government wants and shouldnt have. … As the 2016 campaign gets going, guns and hunting will inevitably be part of its political theater. That may offer a chance for longtime gun-owning candidates to stand out….Already, on the campaign trail, several contenders have used their support for guns as a way to signal broader conservative bona fides. In a party full of internal arguments, this is one thing few will argue with.

Find the speech highlights below.

Bobby Jindal

Biggest applause line: “You sometimes get the idea that president Obama and Hillary Clinton believe that these are just crazy right-wing ideas…But these are not the ideas of a right wing conspiracy. These are the pillars of our nation. And thats why I was glad to write the law in Congress after Hurricane Katrina ensuring that never again can the government seize your firearms after a disaster.”

Biggest flop: “I remember the days when Hollywood actually liked the First Amendment. Well maybe they havent read the First Amendment lately. Theyre too busy dealing with record-low movie attendance.”

Read more here:
GOP hopefuls flock to NRA cattle call

As Scott Walker addresses NRA, concealed carry vote criticized

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on As Scott Walker addresses NRA, concealed carry vote criticized
Apr 112015
 

Gov. Scott Walkers vote against a concealed carry bill in 2002 resurfaced Friday as the likely presidential candidate addressed an annual convention of the National Rifle Association.

Democrats highlighted the vote which clashes with his otherwise lengthy record of supporting Second Amendment rights as yet another example of Walker shifting his position for political gain. The 2002 vote came just before Walker mounted a successful campaign for Milwaukee County executive.

But Walker spokeswoman Kirsten Kukowski countered that the reason Walker voted against the bill was because it came up after a lengthy late-night session and didnt follow the normal legislative process.

Gov. Walker was protecting the voters through transparency, Kukowski said. This is why the NRA has and continues to believe Gov. Walker stands up for Second Amendment rights, continually giving him good ratings year after year.

Walker didnt address his 2002 vote in his speech Friday, but highlighted how he has an A+ rating from the NRA as governor and had an A rating as a state legislator.

Im proud of that even though some on the left may say its a scarlet letter, Walker said in the speech. I say its a badge of honor.

The likely 2016 presidential contender has come under fire for shifting his position on various issues, including immigration, right-to-work, abortion, ethanol mandates and the Common Core education standards.

Add concealed carry to the list of issues Walker has changed his position on just to benefit himself, said Jason Pitt, a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee. If weve learned anything from Scott Walker over the past few months its that his constant pandering on issues has defined him as one of the least trustworthy candidates among the 2016 GOP field.

Kukowski said Walkers record of supporting the Second Amendment included:

Co-sponsoring a constitutional amendment in the late 1990s that added the right to keep and bear arms;

Originally posted here:
As Scott Walker addresses NRA, concealed carry vote criticized

Nevada Panel OKs Bill to Create Pro-Second Amendment License Plates

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Nevada Panel OKs Bill to Create Pro-Second Amendment License Plates
Apr 112015
 

A Nevada Senate committee has passed a bill authorizing special license plates showing support for the Second Amendment.

The Senate Transportation Committee voted unanimously Thursday to pass Senate Bill 229, which is sponsored by Republican Sen. Don Gustavson. It now heads for a vote on the Senate floor.

The proposed license plate design features a frontiersman with a gun and the words “Battle Born” and “Protect the Second Amendment.” It would cost more than the standard Nevada license plate design.

Proceeds from sales of the plate would benefit the Nevada Firearms Commission. The committee added an amendment specifying that the money must be used for gun training or gun safety education.

Republican Committee Chair Scott Hammond said he didn’t want the funds to be funneled to political activities

To read more about bills in this session, click here.

See the rest here:
Nevada Panel OKs Bill to Create Pro-Second Amendment License Plates

Rand Paul calls NRA snub 'petty'

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Rand Paul calls NRA snub 'petty'
Apr 112015
 

U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), a 2016 Republican White House hopeful, gestures with his cell phone as he speaks at a campaign event in Milford, New Hampshire April 8, 2015. REUTERS/Joel Page

Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul told Bloomberg News he believed it was petty that the National Rifle Association did not invite him to address attendees at their annual conference in Nashville this weekend.

Other potential Republican White House contenders will speak at the NRA gathering on Thursday, but both the Kentucky Senator and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie were given the snub by the gun rights organization.

The interesting thing is that theres probably no greater advocate for the Second Amendment in Congress than myself, Paul told Bloomberg. To not be invited, probably, will serve more to cast aspersions on their group than it would on me. Because my records pretty clear. It probably looks a little bit petty for them not to invite a major candidate because I raised money for other Second Amendment groups.

Paul claims that the NRA is punishing him for working with other firearm organizations like the National Association for Gun Rights and Gun Owners of America.

See the article here:
Rand Paul calls NRA snub 'petty'

2nd Amendment Keychain – RTBA – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on 2nd Amendment Keychain – RTBA – Video
Apr 082015
 



2nd Amendment Keychain – RTBA
“Shall Not Be Infringed” – The wording is clear! The Right to Bear Arms is an INALIENABLE right that extends to ALL people and now, the Second Amendment is available on a dog tag keychain!…

By: RTBA

Excerpt from:
2nd Amendment Keychain – RTBA – Video

4.7.15 | Second Scoop: Justice in Jersey, Detroit’s Top Cop & CCW, Clear Channel Controversy – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on 4.7.15 | Second Scoop: Justice in Jersey, Detroit’s Top Cop & CCW, Clear Channel Controversy – Video
Apr 082015
 



4.7.15 | Second Scoop: Justice in Jersey, Detroit's Top Cop CCW, Clear Channel Controversy
The Second Scoop: Chris Cheng provides humor, insight, and commentary on the top gun stories you should know about. Come back every Tuesday for a delicious serving of Second Amendment news …

By: Top Shot Chris Cheng

Original post:
4.7.15 | Second Scoop: Justice in Jersey, Detroit’s Top Cop & CCW, Clear Channel Controversy – Video

Dr. Rand Paul on the Second Amendment – Video

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on Dr. Rand Paul on the Second Amendment – Video
Apr 082015
 



Dr. Rand Paul on the Second Amendment
There are too many in Washington who give lip service to the Second Amendment, but vote to restrict gun ownership. I do not support any proposed gun control which would limit the right to gun…

By: Rand Paul

See the original post here:
Dr. Rand Paul on the Second Amendment – Video

State GOP lawmakers look to roll back gun restrictions after midterm wins

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on State GOP lawmakers look to roll back gun restrictions after midterm wins
Apr 072015
 

Conservatives emboldened by election victories are working to roll back gun restrictions in several states, while those on the other side of the debate are claiming success elsewhere in passing initiatives related to gun background checks.

On the pro-gun spectrum, for example, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback last week signed a bill to allow Kansans to carry concealed weapons in the state without training or a permit.

Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb told Fox News, “I think the voters spoke pretty loud and clear in November and elected a pretty pro-gun rights Congress as well as many statehouses across the country and we’re seeing now lots of bills being sponsored…”.

On the other side, Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, said her group is focused on initiatives it can win with voters, rather than legislators.

“In 2013, we helped close the background check loophole in six states,” Watts said. “In 2014, we helped pass laws in red and blue states to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers.”

Watts also pointed to the overwhelming passage of Initiative 594 by voters in Washington state last fall. That law expands the federal background check requirement for gun sales to private dealers, such as those now found at gun shows.

“The gun lobby has been so insidious in this country in taking away the responsibilities that go along with gun rights,” Watts said. She added in an interview with Fox News that the National Rifle Association (NRA) has an annual budget of $350 million.

The NRA said that while its operating budget is close to that figure, a “small fraction” — approximately $20 million — goes toward what it calls ‘political activity,’ with the bulk spent on safety and training programs.

Moms Demand Action works with Everytown for Gun Safety, which is bankrolled by former New York City mayor and billionaire, Michael Bloomberg.

Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), told Fox News, “Billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s tactics may be new, but the fight is the same. The NRA and our five million members stand ready to defend the Second Amendment wherever the battlefield. The majority of Americans do not want more gun control and we will fight tooth and nail to expose Bloomberg’s lies and defeat his extreme gun control agenda. ”

Excerpt from:
State GOP lawmakers look to roll back gun restrictions after midterm wins

GUN RIGHTS BATTLES GOP state legislators seek to ease gun codes

 Second Amendment  Comments Off on GUN RIGHTS BATTLES GOP state legislators seek to ease gun codes
Apr 072015
 

Conservatives emboldened by election victories are working to roll back gun restrictions in several states, while those on the other side of the debate are claiming success elsewhere in passing initiatives related to gun background checks.

On the pro-gun spectrum, for example, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback last week signed a bill to allow Kansans to carry concealed weapons in the state without training or a permit.

Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb told Fox News, “I think the voters spoke pretty loud and clear in November and elected a pretty pro-gun rights Congress as well as many statehouses across the country and we’re seeing now lots of bills being sponsored…”.

On the other side, Shannon Watts, founder of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America, said her group is focused on initiatives it can win with voters, rather than legislators.

“In 2013, we helped close the background check loophole in six states,” Watts said. “In 2014, we helped pass laws in red and blue states to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers.”

Watts also pointed to the overwhelming passage of Initiative 594 by voters in Washington state last fall. That law expands the federal background check requirement for gun sales to private dealers, such as those now found at gun shows.

“The gun lobby has been so insidious in this country in taking away the responsibilities that go along with gun rights,” Watts said. She added in an interview with Fox News that the National Rifle Association (NRA) has an annual budget of $350 million.

The NRA said that while its operating budget is close to that figure, a “small fraction” — approximately $20 million — goes toward what it calls ‘political activity,’ with the bulk spent on safety and training programs.

Moms Demand Action works with Everytown for Gun Safety, which is bankrolled by former New York City mayor and billionaire, Michael Bloomberg.

Chris W. Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), told Fox News, “Billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s tactics may be new, but the fight is the same. The NRA and our five million members stand ready to defend the Second Amendment wherever the battlefield. The majority of Americans do not want more gun control and we will fight tooth and nail to expose Bloomberg’s lies and defeat his extreme gun control agenda. ”

See more here:
GUN RIGHTS BATTLES GOP state legislators seek to ease gun codes




Pierre Teilhard De Chardin | Designer Children | Prometheism | Euvolution | Transhumanism