FWIW: Woodall was one of only six Republicans who opposed legislation that would require all states to honor the concealed weapons permits of other states, arguing that the bill was unnecessary because the Second Amendment already gives Americans the right to bear arms.(Wikipedia)
(It would be interesting to know who was the author of the view that the 2dA "gave us the right")
To the extent the quote above is accurate, Woodall's position is troubling in light of the fact the proposed legislation was designed to remove any doubt of various states as to the purpose of the 2dA.
Found that reference. Here’s the full quote:
“A lone Republican, Freshman Rep. Rob Woodall (R-Ga.), argued that the bill is unnecessary because the Second Amendment already gives Americans the right to bear arms, and said there is no need for legislation that says “we really mean it.”
“The Second Amendment exists so that we can keep and bear arms to defend ourself against government, no matter how well intended,” Woodall said.”
from: http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/194113-house-approves-concealed-weapons-bill
Based on your post, I sent a follow up to get some clarity or at least make the point about a document not granting us a right.
Below is what I sent Matt.graves@mail.house.gov , the staffer I met with in the Congressman’s office today.
(as a letter it was nicely formatted, but not here ...)
Matt –
Good to meet with you and chat a bit about important issues facing us as citizens, as well as Congressman Woodall’s positions on them.
A couple points in review:
1. While I appreciate very much Mr. Woodall (and staff) seeking our input via the survey, I would also very much like to read his principled, fact-based position and his intentions on “gun laws,” the 2nd Amendment and the current ‘debate.’ If this is already published, I would love to get a link from you. ( I can find some of his prior remarks in the public record which clearly favor individual gun rights. )
2. Some reflection on his rationale to vote to oppose the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Bill (H.R. 822) back in November of 2011:
a. Per a quote attributed to Mr. Woodall at http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/194113-house-approves-concealed-weapons
i. “A lone Republican, Freshman Rep. Rob Woodall (R-Ga.), argued that the bill is unnecessary because the Second Amendment already gives Americans the right to bear arms, and said there is no need for legislation that says “we really mean it. The Second Amendment exists so that we can keep and bear arms to defend ourselves against government, no matter how well intended,” Woodall said.”
1. Amen!
b. Note well I strongly support our Congressman’s position and principles, with one exception: the Second Amendment does not GIVE us the right to bear arms, it recognizes the pre-existing Right and explicitly prevents the Federal government from infringing upon it.
i. From the preamble: “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 …”
1. Note well the first five, 8th and 9th amendments are explicitly restrictive, employing “shall not, No XXX shall, shall make no” and similar language.”
a. WHY are Federal restrictions/ infringements even a question with regard to the Second Amendment?
b. The 2nd Amendment specifically restricts the Feds from doing what many “Liberals” are trying to ram through, and the 10th FURTHER says it is not the purview of the Federal Government.
3. Please put me on your list to contact when it’s time to recruit campaign workers.