Reflections on "Reflections"

Why has Massad Ayoob praised John Ashcroft in his "Reflections on the Second Amendment" op-ed? Yes, the Attorney General has given us fine words regarding the Second Amendment, but he refuses to back them up. Instead, he maintains that ALL federal gun control laws are constitutional, falling within the scope of "reasonable and compelling state interest" restrictions. Add to this the push to add more federal prosecutors specifically dedicated to prosecuting "gun crimes" in support of Project Exile/Safe Neighborhoods, a federal power grab violating both the Second and the Tenth Amendments.

With all due respect to Mr. Ayoob, that hardly seems cause for "two cartwheels and a backflip."

Ashcroft's Solicitor General, Ted Olsen, argued against the Supreme Court hearing two gun-related cases that presented Second Amendment arguments, and even argued against restoring gun rights to a law-abiding citizen whose only "offense" was accidentally having a box of ammo in the back of his truck when he visited Mexico. No "crime" was committed in the US, yet this American citizen is still barred for life from owning a gun in the land that supposedly guarantees him that right! Using such logic, an American, say, one of Mr. Ashcroft's fellow Pentecostals caught with a Bible in Saudi Arabia, would be regarded by our government as a felon, with attendant lifetime consequences.

Furthermore, Mr. Ashcroft has ignored the Petition for Enforcement of the Second Amendment, a plea that the federal government enforce the Second Amendment from infringement exactly as they would were other civil rights being violated by government agencies. This Petition has been signed by over 25,000 Americans and sent to the AG over several mailings during the past nine months.

The ONLY response received to date was a letter that did not even mention the redress issues the Petition raised, and it was sent by the DoJ's Chief of Terrorism and Violent Crime. Left unsaid is why they assigned their response to that division, but it appears they equate American citizens exercising their First Amendment rights with terrorists and violent criminals. Tell me this doesn't have (intentional) chilling implications for people who have signed the Petition or may be considering doing so, and for those of us who wrote and continue to promote it.

Ashcroft's words have proven to be hollow and politically motivated -- a scrap thrown to gun owners to make it look like they are making progress without the administration changing a thing. And remember, all it takes is for Bush (who gun owners put over the top, and who won't even allow pilots to be armed, evidently preferring that an F-16 shoot down American hostages) to lose the next election, and the AG will be replaced by a new Lord High Executioner ala Janet Reno, among whose first acts will be to issue an edict rescinding Ashcroft's interpretation.

Words without consistent actions are either meaningless or lies. Ashcroft hasn't shown the "legal acumen and/or judicial temperament and/or intellectual honesty" that the "Reflections" essay credits him with. Until he does, he appears to be just another worm-tongued tyrant -- someone willing to destroy our lives if he catches you, me or Mr. Ayoob defying unconstitutional edicts and claiming our inalienable rights.

David Codrea is a co-founder and director for the national pro-rights media campaign, Citizens of America (CitizensOfAmerica.org), and an advisor and contributor for KeepAndBearArms.com. His professional writing is featured often in Guns and Ammo magazine. Additionally, he is the national coordinator for A Petition for the Enforcement of the Second Amendment (KeepAndBearArms.com/Petition). His archives can be accessed here: KeepAndBearArms.com/Codrea.

Interesting commentary from a gentlemen who has long stood at the forefront of the fight to retain the RKBA.

I don't understand the true agenda here. I myself do judge by deeds, not words, especially when those words are coming from a politician. At the very least, Ashcroft's letter to the NRA back in April of last year, plus subsequent statment, have managed to give the Brady Bunch, the VPC, and assorted other statists a case of ulcers, but I wonder if this is all a show to lull us into apathy. Not that most "gunowners" need much help there. I do not know.

Current Events tell it all.

A North Carolina woman takes a flight out of Atlanta.
Packing her belongings in a small suitcase for carry -on belonging to her husband, she fails to notice the black nylon guncase contained therein.
Due to lax security at the Atlanta airport, the weapon is not discovered.
Only upon making her next flight connection is the weapon found by screeners.

Assuming she is innocent until proven guilty, why is she being arraigned in federal court today?
Why is she being "charged" by the FBI?
Is there any evidence she intended to shoot anyone?
That she took over (hijacked) a plane?
That she ever touched the gun?

Instead, Fox News Channel, (FNC) takes a quote right out of "Dirty Harry" and claims she is carrying "The World's Most Powerful Handgun", a "huge" weapon, with "High Capacity clips", which are illegal for the average citizen to carry.
What Tripe!

Nothing has changed except the rhetoric.
As a long time Missourian, I have purported that Ashcroft is no freind of the gun owner since his nomination for AG, and I continue to question his motives.

Never trust a government or officials that continues to gather power unto itself.
Never trust a government that is afraid of it's own people.

The proof is in the pudding. What that bunch of miscreants in Congress do when the rotten, unconstitutional federal AW ban comes up for renewal/sunsetting will tell the tale. My bet is those SOB's will make it permanent and that piece of crap masquerading as a US Senatrix from Cal, Dianne Feinswine, wil probably try to add amendments to make it even worse.

It's pretty simple from my POV...
H.R.3162 Section 802 (a)(5)(B)(ii)...
to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
It appears that Petitions can be viewed, notice I don't say are viewed, as activities which appear to be intended to influence the policies of "a" government.
I will assume that the possibility of further action from a spurned Petition for the Redress of Grievances might be considered as intimidation or coercion.
(and folks wonder why I stopped signing Petitions...)

I will assume that the possibility of further action from a spurned Petition for the Redress of Grievances might be considered as intimidation or coercion.

Yeah, well, with the signing of the so-called "Campaign Finance Reform" bill, I guess we know all we need to about how the current crop of demigods views the First Amendment.

What that bunch of miscreants in Congress do when the rotten, unconstitutional federal AW ban comes up for renewal/sunsetting will tell the tale.

That particular event is what I have been pointing out to folks for some time now as the most critical acid-test ongoing. I expect our "representatives" to fail us miserably. I hope I'm wrong.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.