MicroBalrog
New member
Is Bush Street-Sweeping our rights under the rug?
So, the Bush Administration has apparently – again – acknowledged the Second Amendment says, well, exactly what it says . The Second Amendment says, to remind anybody who still doesn’t know, ‘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.’ This means, in other words, that, because, to preserve freedom, we need to have an armed and trained population, the governent is barred from infringing upon the - pre-existing - right to own and carry weapons. For forty years the United States Government has claimed that this means only that the government has the right to arm its employees. Now, the Bush administration has, again, reaffirmed it’s devotion to common sense. So what precisely does this mean?
Nothing. Oh, I can see certain types howling now: “Oooh! But if Kerry got elected, it would be worse! Oooh! Horror!” I am not too sure about that, but let us let this slide. Kerry lost. Get over it. We are not talking about that fellow any more. And, since the “Oooh! Horror!”-types don’t have a boogeyman to throw about anymore, I will ask, again, “what happened to the USAS-12 ?”
As you might remember, the Gun Control Act of 1968, among other things, allows the Department of Treasury (now Justice), to ban shotguns it deems “unsporting” (technicaly, it’s requiring a $200 tax and a six-months-to-a-year waiting period. In the case of shotguns, it amounts to a de-facto ban). Now, I am not going to even discuss the whole idea of the “sporting purpose” clause. I will simply note that, since the current administration supposedly respects our right to own arms for defensive, rather than sporting, purposes, it should move to relax regulations introduced by the treasury based on the clause, and perhaps pressure Congress to reword it.
Does anybody remember a revolving-action shotgun called the USAS-12 “Streetsweeper”? The USAS-12, an obvious candidate for a defensive shotgun role, was retroactively (is that even legal?) reclassified by the Clinton administration as a destructive device (same as an M-203 launcher or similar weapon), because it was found to be supposedly too unwieldy for trap shooting.
There is no need for a Congressional vote to make the USAS-12 “legal” again. All is needed is a stroke of a pen from the Chief Executive – a man who supposedly supports the right to keep and bear arms.
The observant reader will note that the “new” DoJ document is dated August 24th, 2004. It has been nearly two months, and we still have to see any action from President Bush on the issue.
Commentators from the Left have already voiced suspicions that Bush is avoiding taking action on the issue to avoid losing his allies in Congress and Senate votes from the so-called “Mushy Middle”. If they are right, then, again, Bush has sold civil rights in return for a political victory.
The Republican party destroyed slavery and repealed the draft. Will they find the guts to strike another blow for freedom? Or will the accusations of the people often referred to as “liberals” (I call them Blissninny PseudoLiberals myself, there’s nothing freedom-loving about them) – come true? Time will tell. I recommend you watch the fate of the StreetSweeper for guidance.
So, the Bush Administration has apparently – again – acknowledged the Second Amendment says, well, exactly what it says . The Second Amendment says, to remind anybody who still doesn’t know, ‘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.’ This means, in other words, that, because, to preserve freedom, we need to have an armed and trained population, the governent is barred from infringing upon the - pre-existing - right to own and carry weapons. For forty years the United States Government has claimed that this means only that the government has the right to arm its employees. Now, the Bush administration has, again, reaffirmed it’s devotion to common sense. So what precisely does this mean?
Nothing. Oh, I can see certain types howling now: “Oooh! But if Kerry got elected, it would be worse! Oooh! Horror!” I am not too sure about that, but let us let this slide. Kerry lost. Get over it. We are not talking about that fellow any more. And, since the “Oooh! Horror!”-types don’t have a boogeyman to throw about anymore, I will ask, again, “what happened to the USAS-12 ?”
As you might remember, the Gun Control Act of 1968, among other things, allows the Department of Treasury (now Justice), to ban shotguns it deems “unsporting” (technicaly, it’s requiring a $200 tax and a six-months-to-a-year waiting period. In the case of shotguns, it amounts to a de-facto ban). Now, I am not going to even discuss the whole idea of the “sporting purpose” clause. I will simply note that, since the current administration supposedly respects our right to own arms for defensive, rather than sporting, purposes, it should move to relax regulations introduced by the treasury based on the clause, and perhaps pressure Congress to reword it.
Does anybody remember a revolving-action shotgun called the USAS-12 “Streetsweeper”? The USAS-12, an obvious candidate for a defensive shotgun role, was retroactively (is that even legal?) reclassified by the Clinton administration as a destructive device (same as an M-203 launcher or similar weapon), because it was found to be supposedly too unwieldy for trap shooting.
There is no need for a Congressional vote to make the USAS-12 “legal” again. All is needed is a stroke of a pen from the Chief Executive – a man who supposedly supports the right to keep and bear arms.
The observant reader will note that the “new” DoJ document is dated August 24th, 2004. It has been nearly two months, and we still have to see any action from President Bush on the issue.
Commentators from the Left have already voiced suspicions that Bush is avoiding taking action on the issue to avoid losing his allies in Congress and Senate votes from the so-called “Mushy Middle”. If they are right, then, again, Bush has sold civil rights in return for a political victory.
The Republican party destroyed slavery and repealed the draft. Will they find the guts to strike another blow for freedom? Or will the accusations of the people often referred to as “liberals” (I call them Blissninny PseudoLiberals myself, there’s nothing freedom-loving about them) – come true? Time will tell. I recommend you watch the fate of the StreetSweeper for guidance.
