Premier Gun Grabber Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced a bill today, the “Assault Weapons Ban of 2013“. This bill would not only bans “assault rifles,” but, also numerous handguns and shotguns, too. It would also ban magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
Now, this is a common game that’s played in congress. Feinstein knows she’s overreaching. But, she doesn’t expect this to survive intact. What she expects is a bunch of haggling over this bill, where compromises are made and things are added and subtracted from the bill.
What I suggest to 2nd Amendment rights advocates in congress is …. don’t. Let them pile even more totalitarian usurpations on. Then, leave it for an up or down vote. It won’t survive. It won’t survive congress and it won’t survive judicial review.
But, there’s something else 2nd Amendment advocates should be doing today.
We all know the words of the 2nd Amendment.
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.
But, are we all familiar with the preamble of the Bill of Rights? (U.S.)
- Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine
- THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
- RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
- ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution.
Now, doesn’t the Second Amendment read more to the interpretation of gun owner than gun grabbers when the clause in the preamble is placed in context? It reads like this….
In order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: … 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.
That’s how to properly context and properly read the Bill of Rights, each one, including and especially, the 2nd.
It isn’t legitimate that congress even be considering such an action. It’s contrary to the authority of the Constitution, from which congress gets their authority. A presidential signature doesn’t make it any more legitimate.