Mediaboss Marketing

Gun violence prevention advocates

There is a good reason the process of amending Iowas Constitution is drawn-out. Two separate legislative sessions must act, followed by ratification by Iowa citizens. The intent is clearly for careful deliberation by legislators and a final decision by a fully informed public. Sponsors of SJ1 and HSB9, a constitutional amendment to ensure Iowans the right to bear arms, seem uninterested in either.

Its sponsors would have you believe it simply enshrines federal Second Amendment protections in Iowas Constitution. However, this is a supercharged Second Amendment stipulating that Any and all restrictions of this right [to bear arms] shall be subject to strict scrutiny. The Second Amendment does not say (and the U.S. Supreme Court never held) that strict scrutiny applies to all gun regulations.

Strict scrutiny is the highest level of scrutiny by the courts, putting up a high barrier not only to enactment of new restrictions on gun ownership and use but any and all restrictions. Recent polls in Iowa show the vast majority of the public, including a majority of gun owners, favor closing loopholes in the background check system and other sensible restrictions such as permit requirements. At a time when gun violence is increasingly recognized as a public health crisis, legislative committees dealing with SJ1 and HSB9 should show their commitment to responsive government by offering adequate time for their deliberation.

Gun violence prevention advocates:

Temple Hiatt, Iowa City

Lori Durian, North Liberty

Jodie Theobald, Iowa City

Lenore Holte, Coralville

Patricia Zebrowski, Iowa City

Leslie Carpenter, Iowa City

Susan Bryant, Iowa City

Rebecca Truszkowski, Coralville

Julie Kearney, Iowa City

Liz OHara, Iowa City

Gun violence prevention advocates

More here:
This is not the Second Amendment - The Gazette

On Monday, Feb. 1 there will be a public hearing, on Tuesday, Feb. 2 the Vernon County Board of Supervisors will vote on a resolution masquerading as something allegedly designed to preserve the Second Amendment of the United States.

This partisan resolution will preserve nothing. The Second Amendment like all the others is well protected by the U.S. Constitution. To make any change to a Constitutional Amendment requires a vote to pass by a minimum of three-quarters of the 50 states.

The Second Amendment is not in danger of being nullified or modified. No evidence has been presented to show the Second Amendment to be in danger.

The Second Amendment consists of just one comprehensive, concise sentence that needs no expansion or modification by Vernon County nor anyone else. There is nothing in the resolution that is new other than semantics intended to provide a solution for a problem that does not exist.

Rather than predicting future problems why not work on solving Vernon County's real problems and concerns rather than inventing one.

If this passes we can be assured that it will become precedent for more of the same in the future. We in Vernon County do not need this resolution. Represent the citizens of the county not some partisan idealism.

See the original post here:
Letter to the editor: Second Amendment preservation resolution is unecessary - La Crosse Tribune

To the editor,

In recent times, gun regulations have been spoken of quite frequently.

I see the point of gun regulation proponents quite frequently, and I empathize with their stories. However much I understand, I disagree with their idea. In my opinion, the most important thing in America is our right to bear arms.

Some people say that the Second Amendment was created exclusively to uphold militias. They argue that the police force is this militia. When you break it down, that is a foolish understanding of the amendment.

The Bill of Rights was established to give rights to the people and to limit the government. The question is would it really make sense for the government to give itself the right to have guns. Ultimately that makes no sense.

So, we have now established that the Second Amendment is established for the people to bear arms. Once we get to this point, many people say that it is only for hunting and self-defense. Once again, upon further examination, this can be concluded as false.

The Second Amendment was established swiftly after the American Revolution. The thought of a revolution was fresh on everyones mind. It is entirely reasonable then that they would plant the tools for independence should the event arise again.

So, it can be clearly stated that our right to bear arms in the U.S. has been infringed far past its extended existence. My end point is that we should not stand for gun control any longer.

There is a saying that says give them an inch and they will take a mile. This applies especially to the government. We must not give them an inch, or they will take a mile.

Therefore, we must resist so that we may have a more-free future.

Duncan Lamb

Franklin

Excerpt from:
Letter to the Editor: We must resist any attempt to weaken 2nd Amendment - williamsonherald.com

Burkhead: Political Violence and the Second Amendment - The Truth About Guns

Violence, then, is really only justified when there is no other recourse, when speech is shut down, when public opinion no longer matters, when elections are decided, as alluded to by Stalin, not by those who vote, but by those who count the votes. And when you cross that line, its not an issue of protest and go home but its war.

Dont kid yourself that its anything else. The war might be justified, but it remains a war and you are an enemy combatant to the powers that be. They might just treat you as a criminal if they dont want to acknowledge the war. Or they may go ahead and acknowledge the war and brand you a traitor. In either case, you are pledging your life, your fortune, and your sacred honor to that cause.

If you arent ready to do that, then keep your protest peaceful, and stay far away from those who do not.

David Burkhead in Political Violence and the Second Amendment

Burkhead: Political Violence and the Second Amendment

Read more here:
Burkhead: Political Violence and the Second Amendment - The Truth About Guns

Filibuster Preservation Bought Two Years For The Second Amendment, iStock-1154438278

Washington DC -(AmmoLand.com)-The decision by Senators Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin to keep the legislative filibuster has given Second Amendment supporters something they desperately needed: Time. The next two years will be critical, both to shift the Senate landscape and to also regain the House.

Sinema and Manchin are not the most reliable of champions. In 2018, we noted that Martha McSally was a better choice as compared to the former. The latter could have been replaced by West Virginia Attorney General Pat Morrissey. Those two races, and the failure to beat Jon Tester loom large now. Had we won, it would mean control the Senate stayed in GOP hands, and it would have been a massive check on the Biden-Harris regime.

That is not the case, though. But by keeping the filibuster, it means the Supreme Court keeps its sure 5-4 majority on Second Amendment cases (6-3 if Roberts wants to influence who writes the rulings). That means there is a chance for key Second Amendment cases, like the Duncan case, to reach the Supreme Court, and shift that landscape in our favor.

This also will halt some of the worst legislative efforts, like campaign reform legislation that really has silencing opposition to anti-Second Amendment politicians and legislation as its aim. Again, we have just seen that our chances of taking back Congress from those who would steal our freedoms have improved.

But more importantly, it gives us time to win a lot of the local and state elections that will dictate the course of the 2024 presidential election. These state and local races matter big-time, and in many cases, they take much less effort to win than a congressional race, much less some of the statewide races.

Here, though, is the most important thing that Second Amendment supporters now have time to do: They have time to have those conversations that can change peoples minds about Second Amendment issues. The Biden-Harris regime is, as many predicted, governing in a manner to please the most extreme elements and this is a chance for Second Amendment supporters to capitalize on this.

The fact that we are confronting what has to be the most hostile regime to our Second Amendment rights in Americas history require we step up. To build strength for the 2021 off-year elections and 2022 midterms that will shape future elections, Second Amendment supporters should support the NRAs Institute for Legislative Action and Political Victory Fund.

About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.

Read more:
Filibuster Preservation Bought Two Years For The Second Amendment - AmmoLand Shooting Sports News