In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

2nd Amendment Caucus Created in US House

CharChar Member Posts: 242 ✭✭✭
edited April 2004 in General Discussion
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Aaron Johnson

April 26, 2004 (202) 225-4676



2nd Amendment Caucus Created In The U.S. House

Reps. Musgrave & Goode organize caucus to defend individuals' Constitutional rights



Washington, DC: Today, Congressmen Marilyn Musgrave (CO-04) and Virgil Goode (VA-05) announced the creation of the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus. Comprised of 38 Members of Congress, this caucus is solely dedicated to the right of lawful individuals to own firearms as granted in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.



"As lawmakers in our nation's highest legislative body, we must fight to preserve the Constitutional right for individual citizens to keep and bear arms," said Musgrave. "While many in our nation's capital seek to chip away at the right of firearm ownership and possession, the 2nd Amendment Caucus is committed to defending lawful gun owner's constitutional rights in our nation, without compromise. Their voice will be heard in Congress."



"In fighting for and protecting our Second Amendment rights, it is important to be vigilant," said Virgil Goode. "I hope that this caucus will further that goal."



The caucus was created by Musgrave and Goode to ensure lawful gun owners are tenaciously defended in Congress. Its mission statement states:

The members of the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus know and understand that the Second Amendment to the Constitution is clearly written to protect the fundamental and individual right to keep and bear arms.



Furthermore, we understand that the Second Amendment does not refer to a collective right of federal or state governments. The Second Amendment refers to the individual citizen's right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of defense, recreation, and collection.



We oppose the banning of firearms, their accessories, their manufacture and their importation. Furthermore, we support recognizing the right of lawful citizens to carry a weapon both at home and while traveling the nation.



In upholding these principles we have joined the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus. This caucus' purpose for existence is solely to accomplish the above stated goals and protect the Second Amendment as it is written.



At its inception, the caucus consists of 38 Representatives, including: Roscoe Bartlett, Eric Cantor, Steve Chabot, Jo Ann Davis, Jim DeMint, J.D. Hayworth, Peter Hoekstra, John Hostettler, Ernest Istook, Sam Johnson, Sue Myrick, Mike Pence, Steve Pearce, Joe Pitts, John Shadegg, Tom Tancredo, and Pat Toomey.



# # #



Marilyn Musgrave was elected to the United State House of Representative in January 2003, and she represents Colorado's Fourth Congressional District. Musgrave is a member of the House Committees on Agriculture, Education and the Workforce, and Small Business. To learn more about Rep. Musgrave please visit her official website at http://www.house.gov/musgrave.

Comments

  • RugerNinerRugerNiner Member Posts: 12,636 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It really hurts that Pat Toomey lost the election.

    sniper1.gif Remember...Terrorist are attacking Civilians; Not the Government. Protect Yourself!
    awcountdown_sm.gifhttp://www.awbansunset.com/
    spn05j5e04xq.gif


    Keep your Powder dry and your Musket well oiled.
    NRA Lifetime Benefactor Member.
  • jsergovicjsergovic Member Posts: 5,526
    edited November -1
    Called Mom back East. Said Fast Eddie was really bombing with his gun stance.
    And surprised as heck she was in that loop.

    This came up when she coerced me into explaining the book I'm reading, Unintended Consequences.

    Incidently, there will be a multiple book giveaway of this title in the coming year.
    I have a Philly friend / bookstore owner keeping an eye out for copies in decent shape.
  • salzosalzo Member Posts: 6,396 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    quote:Originally posted by RugerNiner
    It really hurts that Pat Toomey lost the election.





    You can thank George Bush and Rick Santorum for that.

    "Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
    -Jimmy the cheese man
  • offerorofferor Member Posts: 8,625 ✭✭
    edited November -1
    If it's a caucus, maybe citizens will be asked to participate at some point. I'd get in line to help these folks. Hopefully, THEY all have access to a copy of Unintended Consequences. I'd like to find a complete list of the members, by the way, so we can e-mail them some helpful expert source material. There's a lot of mythology out there currently passing for "fact."

    Actually, "recreation and collection" are only side benefits of the Second Amendment's guarantee of gun ownership. Its only stated purpose, of course, is what this group calls defense ("security"), which is why in that 1934 federal court case, the court's test for a gun legal for citizen ownership was simply, "has it ever been used by the military?" If the answer was yes, it was legal for us too. The definition of a legal gun for citizens in one of the most pivotal gun control cases in history sounds almost odd, or backward, today, but that was the test originally. If they have it, we may have it -- for defense of our free state (homeland security by another name).

    Sadly, in the 1934 case, the court wasn't sure whether a short shotgun had been used by the military or not -- they thought it hadn't -- and the guy's lawyer didn't show up that day to give evidence that sawed off shotguns HAD indeed been used by our army in the trenches in WWI -- so the defendant lost that point and the case became an ENTIRELY MISTAKEN precedent for gun control. Somewhere along the line, something even worse occurred -- the test of "military use" was lost altogether.

    But according to the federal court's own statements in 1934, we ARE to be able to own any arm used by the military (or law enforcement, one assumes). It's been a tragedy of errors since that constitutional error started the snowball rolling. The result today is that we have a lot of gun controlling politicians like Feinstein displaying their ignorance of the constitution on national television by talking about "support of the Second Amendment right to hunt" and making wide-eyed emotionalist statements against all guns, magazines and ammo "whose only purpose is TO KILL someone!!!" Horrors!

    Well, yeah, lady. That's kinda the whole point. You can't secure your free state armed with any gun inferior to your attacker's. That's been proven time and again. But these people only read history selectively any more -- otherwise they'd know a lot more about the intent of the founders, not to mention winning skirmishes with appropriate arms.

    T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."

    NRAwethepeople.jpgNRA Life Member
  • ZERODINZERODIN Member Posts: 6,338
    edited November -1
    Offeror:

    I am learning a lot from you on the NFA lately. Can you recommend any books or names of court cases I can try to scrounge up that describe the whole situation?

    I had always been under the mistaken impression that it came about to give law enforcement an edge over mobsters. I don't like being wrong, so when I find out I am wrong, I like to be completely correct in the future.

    Thanks.
Sign In or Register to comment.