Archive for the ‘Second Amendment’ Category

National Rifle Association: What is it and how important is it in the U.S.? – Marca

The attack at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, which left 21 people dead, is the second school tragedy in the United States, only after Sandy Hook, where 26 people were killed on December 14, 2012.

And now a shooting in Illinois' Highland Park, where so far six people have been killed and multiple wounded.

This new black chapter in U.S. history puts the spotlight on the responsibility of the National Rifle Association (NRA), which promotes freedom of gun ownership.

Although its leader, Wayne LaPierre, has denied any responsibility for his organization in past shootings and has fervently defended gun ownership.

The NRA emerged in 1871 as a recreational group designed to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis," notes the BBC.

In 1934 it took its step into politics, when it began to send to its members draft legislation related to facilities for acquiring armaments.

It was that same year when he promoted the approval of the National Firearms Act.

Years later, in 1968, it achieved a new regulation of the same type that facilitated access to these items.

Mainly, it is to promote the freedom to own firearms among civilians, based on a controversial defense of the Second Amendment.

The Association attacks any measure that restricts the right to bear arms as an attack on freedom.

It also strongly opposes even measures such as attempts to ban the sale of assault rifles to civilians or devices that multiply the lethal power of semi-automatic weapons.

In 2018, Donald Trump claimed that what many people don't understand "or don't want to understand" is that "friends" who work at the NRA, like LaPierre, are "great people" and "great American patriots."

The number of members it has is not exactly known, as the NRA claims to have more than five million followers, although opposing groups say the number is lower and that its leadership inflates the figures.

However, research by the Pew Research Center, conducted in 2017, revealed that around 19 million people recognize themselves as members of the organization, even if they do not actively militate in it.

The Association has lobbied hard to prevent any gun control measures under the argument that these make the United States a safer country and that it is a right backed by the Constitution, an argument that has become controversial in the face of the increase in mass shootings in the country.

Despite the Sandy Hook school shooting in 2012 and the Marjory Stone Douglas school shooting in 2018, the NRA has rejected proposals to impose controls on sales and has claimed as solutions putting armed police in schools and not giving guns to "mentally ill" people.

The NRA was ranked as one of the three most influential lobbying groups in Washington, according to a survey conducted by Fortune magazine in 1999.

An investigation by The Washington Post, notes that the NRA has interfered over the years to slow down gun control investigations and has moved its influence on the passage of legislation and endorsed or rejected candidates for governor, Congress or the presidency.

The BBC notes that since 1968, the Association created an Action Committee aimed at supporting or fighting politicians depending on their position on gun control.

They also conduct campaigns to influence public opinion on the image of candidates.

In addition, the NRA donates large amounts of money to politicians who support the deregulation of gun sales.

Excerpt from:
National Rifle Association: What is it and how important is it in the U.S.? - Marca

A discussion of handguns, concealed carry, the Second Amendment, and the current US Supreme Court – Public Radio Tulsa

On this edition of ST, we're discussing the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in the case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In a 6-to-3 ruling, the Court struck down a century-old New York State law that put strict limits on the use of handguns. It's a decision that will affect not just New York but also New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland, California, and Hawaii. It's also, of course, one of a few different recent Supreme Court rulings that could help to foster sweeping changes throughout American society. Our guest is Eric Ruben, a Fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law. Ruben is also an assistant professor of Law at the SMU Dedman School of Law; his work focuses on criminal law, legal ethics, and the Second Amendment. He's a frequent commentator on the right to keep and bear arms, and his writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Atlantic, Vox, Scotusblog, and elsewhere.

Read more:
A discussion of handguns, concealed carry, the Second Amendment, and the current US Supreme Court - Public Radio Tulsa

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution – The Star Democrat

Country

United States of AmericaUS Virgin IslandsUnited States Minor Outlying IslandsCanadaMexico, United Mexican StatesBahamas, Commonwealth of theCuba, Republic ofDominican RepublicHaiti, Republic ofJamaicaAfghanistanAlbania, People's Socialist Republic ofAlgeria, People's Democratic Republic ofAmerican SamoaAndorra, Principality ofAngola, Republic ofAnguillaAntarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S)Antigua and BarbudaArgentina, Argentine RepublicArmeniaArubaAustralia, Commonwealth ofAustria, Republic ofAzerbaijan, Republic ofBahrain, Kingdom ofBangladesh, People's Republic ofBarbadosBelarusBelgium, Kingdom ofBelizeBenin, People's Republic ofBermudaBhutan, Kingdom ofBolivia, Republic ofBosnia and HerzegovinaBotswana, Republic ofBouvet Island (Bouvetoya)Brazil, Federative Republic ofBritish Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago)British Virgin IslandsBrunei DarussalamBulgaria, People's Republic ofBurkina FasoBurundi, Republic ofCambodia, Kingdom ofCameroon, United Republic ofCape Verde, Republic ofCayman IslandsCentral African RepublicChad, Republic ofChile, Republic ofChina, People's Republic ofChristmas IslandCocos (Keeling) IslandsColombia, Republic ofComoros, Union of theCongo, Democratic Republic ofCongo, People's Republic ofCook IslandsCosta Rica, Republic ofCote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of theCyprus, Republic ofCzech RepublicDenmark, Kingdom ofDjibouti, Republic ofDominica, Commonwealth ofEcuador, Republic ofEgypt, Arab Republic ofEl Salvador, Republic ofEquatorial Guinea, Republic ofEritreaEstoniaEthiopiaFaeroe IslandsFalkland Islands (Malvinas)Fiji, Republic of the Fiji IslandsFinland, Republic ofFrance, French RepublicFrench GuianaFrench PolynesiaFrench Southern TerritoriesGabon, Gabonese RepublicGambia, Republic of theGeorgiaGermanyGhana, Republic ofGibraltarGreece, Hellenic RepublicGreenlandGrenadaGuadaloupeGuamGuatemala, Republic ofGuinea, RevolutionaryPeople's Rep'c ofGuinea-Bissau, Republic ofGuyana, Republic ofHeard and McDonald IslandsHoly See (Vatican City State)Honduras, Republic ofHong Kong, Special Administrative Region of ChinaHrvatska (Croatia)Hungary, Hungarian People's RepublicIceland, Republic ofIndia, Republic ofIndonesia, Republic ofIran, Islamic Republic ofIraq, Republic ofIrelandIsrael, State ofItaly, Italian RepublicJapanJordan, Hashemite Kingdom ofKazakhstan, Republic ofKenya, Republic ofKiribati, Republic ofKorea, Democratic People's Republic ofKorea, Republic ofKuwait, State ofKyrgyz RepublicLao People's Democratic RepublicLatviaLebanon, Lebanese RepublicLesotho, Kingdom ofLiberia, Republic ofLibyan Arab JamahiriyaLiechtenstein, Principality ofLithuaniaLuxembourg, Grand Duchy ofMacao, Special Administrative Region of ChinaMacedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic ofMadagascar, Republic ofMalawi, Republic ofMalaysiaMaldives, Republic ofMali, Republic ofMalta, Republic ofMarshall IslandsMartiniqueMauritania, Islamic Republic ofMauritiusMayotteMicronesia, Federated States ofMoldova, Republic ofMonaco, Principality ofMongolia, Mongolian People's RepublicMontserratMorocco, Kingdom ofMozambique, People's Republic ofMyanmarNamibiaNauru, Republic ofNepal, Kingdom ofNetherlands AntillesNetherlands, Kingdom of theNew CaledoniaNew ZealandNicaragua, Republic ofNiger, Republic of theNigeria, Federal Republic ofNiue, Republic ofNorfolk IslandNorthern Mariana IslandsNorway, Kingdom ofOman, Sultanate ofPakistan, Islamic Republic ofPalauPalestinian Territory, OccupiedPanama, Republic ofPapua New GuineaParaguay, Republic ofPeru, Republic ofPhilippines, Republic of thePitcairn IslandPoland, Polish People's RepublicPortugal, Portuguese RepublicPuerto RicoQatar, State ofReunionRomania, Socialist Republic ofRussian FederationRwanda, Rwandese RepublicSamoa, Independent State ofSan Marino, Republic ofSao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic ofSaudi Arabia, Kingdom ofSenegal, Republic ofSerbia and MontenegroSeychelles, Republic ofSierra Leone, Republic ofSingapore, Republic ofSlovakia (Slovak Republic)SloveniaSolomon IslandsSomalia, Somali RepublicSouth Africa, Republic ofSouth Georgia and the South Sandwich IslandsSpain, Spanish StateSri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic ofSt. HelenaSt. Kitts and NevisSt. LuciaSt. Pierre and MiquelonSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudan, Democratic Republic of theSuriname, Republic ofSvalbard & Jan Mayen IslandsSwaziland, Kingdom ofSweden, Kingdom ofSwitzerland, Swiss ConfederationSyrian Arab RepublicTaiwan, Province of ChinaTajikistanTanzania, United Republic ofThailand, Kingdom ofTimor-Leste, Democratic Republic ofTogo, Togolese RepublicTokelau (Tokelau Islands)Tonga, Kingdom ofTrinidad and Tobago, Republic ofTunisia, Republic ofTurkey, Republic ofTurkmenistanTurks and Caicos IslandsTuvaluUganda, Republic ofUkraineUnited Arab EmiratesUnited Kingdom of Great Britain & N. IrelandUruguay, Eastern Republic ofUzbekistanVanuatuVenezuela, Bolivarian Republic ofViet Nam, Socialist Republic ofWallis and Futuna IslandsWestern SaharaYemenZambia, Republic ofZimbabwe

See original here:
The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution - The Star Democrat

Second Amendment: Beyond Politics or Against Politics? – Econlib

A widespread belief is that the political system must be responsive to voters demands. But this is not obvious at all. Consider the following statement in the Wall Street Journals report on the adoption of a gun control bill by Congress (House Expected to Approve Landmark Gun Legislation, June 24, 2022):

The House was expected to pass the widest firearms legislation in decades Friday, hours after the bipartisan package won Senate approval, clearing the way for President Bidens signature and giving supporters hope that the countrys political system can respond to mounting gun violence.

Suppose the majority of the voters are in favor of slavery or that they are at least willing to accept it in return for something else as part of political bargaining. Or suppose that, in order to reduce murders by 39%, a majority of American voters wanted to jail all young males from their 17th birthday until they turn 25. Should the political system be responsive to this? Many people, including libertarians, classical liberals, and your humble blogger, would answer no. What other people mean when they say that the political system should be responsive is that it should be responsive to what they want.

Libertarians and classical liberals believe that the political system should not be responsive to majority demands on certain issues. A constitution, written or unwritten, should aim at protecting individual rights in an autoregulated social order, whatever a political majority happens to want. Some constitutional principles are beyond politics.

But what should be and should not be beyond politics? To try and answer this question, it is useful to be cognizant with James Buchanans constitutional political economy. In this perspective, what should be beyond politics are general rules that could presumably meet the consent of every and all individualsconstitutional rules that govern and constrain day-to-day politics. Under these constraints, politics is the way citizens bargain toward non-unanimous collective choices that are presumed necessary for efficient social cooperation. (On this approach, you may want to have a look at my Econlib review of James Buchanan and Gordon Tullocks classic The Calculus of Consent; and my review of Buchanans Why I, Too, Am Not a Conservative in Regulation.)

The implications of this abstract theory are not always obvious. They require reflection and analysis. To take a current example, the Second Amendment of the American constitution guarantees residents of this country the right to keep and bear arms, which cannot be abrogated nor abridged trough ordinary politics. The Supreme Court just reaffirmed the primacy of the Second argument over politics (although it still allowed political regulations that arguably contradict the principle). Imagine if the First Amendment was subject to constant political meddling. Citizens may unanimously want to change the constitution, but it is not crystal clear how we make sure that the amendment process is not corrupted by politics.

It is pretty clear that there could be no unanimity on abrogating or even weakening the Second Amendment, in which case the constitutional rule would stand and remain beyond politics. In practice, of course, if authoritarians and bigots become a stable majority and cannot peacefully persuade the rest of the citizenry, the constitution will likely be violated. Yet, the longer it holds and the more gridlock it creates, the more likely a temporary majority will be unable to abolish the liberties of a minority.

There is another answer the question of how to preserve the (conventional) rules that should be beyond politics but are undermined by politics. It is to escape politics altogether. Anthony de Jasay thus took a stand against politics, including in his book with this very title (Against Politics, Routledge, 1998). In this perspective, one believes or hopes that a system of individual liberty will work better without an overpowering state (see my discussion of Michael Huemers defense of anarchy in Regulation). If anarchy works, any individual would of course be free to keep and bear arms, or not, as he (or she) wishes.

One thing is pretty sure: a system where politics (defined as the making of collective choices without unanimous consent) is supreme cannot be trusted to preserve individual rights. The political system should not be responsive to every wish. And it cannot be responsible to every wish be as long as individuals hold different preferences and values.

Read more from the original source:
Second Amendment: Beyond Politics or Against Politics? - Econlib

Letter: It’s worth trying to amend Second Amendment to ban assault rifles – Petoskey News-Review

John J. Mc Caugney| Gaylord

Im writing in praise of Dr. deLespinasses article, Protect schools, home-security, hunters: Amend the Second Amendment in the Gaylord Herald Times on June 17. His proposal is the most novel suggestion I have ever read in the continuing U.S. gun debate.

As Dr. de Lepinasse correctly notes, the Founding Fathers wanted: A well-regulated militia … not everyone owning whatever weapon they fancied and in any quantity they desire!

More: Paul deLespinasse: Protect schools, home-security, hunters: Amend the Second Amendment

The only comparison to the constitutional Second Amendment admonition for A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state… is the National Guard. I know that the National Guard is well trained in the use of their weapons. I wish I could believe that the same is true of the youngest Americans who at 18 are usually not well trained in hardly anything.

We can all agree with Dr. deLespinasse that Amending the Constitution is usually harder than merely enacting laws. Think of the still unpassed Equal Right Amendment (ERA), for example.

Still, wouldnt trying to amend the Second Amendment to ban assault weapons be worth the effort? We know that when we had a congressional ban on assault weapons 1994-2004, the number of mass shootings was greatly reduced. Dont our kids, teachers and seniors deserve better from us than to be sitting ducks waiting for the next slaughter?

Dr. John J. Mc Caugney, Ed.D.

Gaylord

See the rest here:
Letter: It's worth trying to amend Second Amendment to ban assault rifles - Petoskey News-Review