guns & purses (was Re: guns & crime)

Matt Cramer cramer at unix01.voicenet.com
Thu Oct 19 12:31:03 PDT 2000


On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Justin Schwartz wrote:


> I can find no case satisfying that description under the Westlaw 5th
> Cir. database or under the S.Ct database for cert granted. More details,
> like a cite? --jks

Here's the only article I saved. I couldn't find it on Findlaw (I don't have an account for Westlaw, as IANAL), but then again Findlaw only seems to list decisions, not schedules or dockets.

For the conspiracy theorists, I was unable to locate this article in the back issues of the Liberator Online; this is issue 12, and the archives stop at issue 10.

Caution lefty friends: don't visit self-gov.org without first being prepared for dangerous libertarian ideas.

Matt

-- Matt Cramer <cramer at voicenet.com> http://www.voicenet.com/~cramer/ I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.

-Prof

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2000 21:07:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Advocates for Self-Government <advo at best.com> Reply-To: liberator-request at theadvocates.org To: liberator at theadvocates.org Subject: Liberator OnLine, Vol. 5, No. 12

<snip>

THE LIBERATOR ONLINE

June 28, 2000

Vol. 5, No. 12

Circulation: over 40,000 in 94 countries

Published by the Advocates for Self-Government.

Created and edited by Paul Schmidt, mailto:paul at self-gov.org

Co-edited by James W. Harris, mailto:james at self-gov.org

_________________________________________________________________

GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS, UNBELIEVABLE NEWS

by James W. Harris

<snip> [This is an excert from a digest of articles - MSC]

U.S. Department of Justice: Americans Have No Gun Rights

The Clinton Justice Department has made its position on the Second

Amendment shockingly plain and clear: there is no Constitutional right

to buy, sell or own any firearm, and the government can take weapons

away from you any time it chooses.

The astonishing remarks came on Tuesday June 13, during oral arguments

in the case of U.S. v. Emerson in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals.

The case involves a routine restraining order placed on Dr. Timothy

Emerson, issued while he was going through a divorce. Since 1994,

federal law has prohibited possession of a firearm by a person under a

restraining order -- even if, as in this case, there is no threat of

violence.

Dr. Emerson - who was totally unaware of this obscure federal statute,

as was the judge who issued the restraining order - was subsequently

arrested for owning a pistol. He challenged the law. On March 30,

1999, U.S. District Judge Sam R. Cummings of Lubbock, Texas declared

that the statute, because it prohibited gun ownership without finding

any threat of violence, violated Dr. Emerson's Second Amendment right

to own firearms and was thus unconstitutional.

The U.S. Justice Department appealed, and the result was one of the

most dramatic gun rights court arguments in U.S. history.

According to witnesses, Judge William L. Garwood, the senior judge,

seemed startled by the government's statist interpretation of the

Second Amendment.

Here are some excerpts from the oral arguments, as recorded by

observer (and radio talk show host) Tom Gresham:

Judge Garwood (to U.S. Department of Justice attorney Meteja): "You

are saying that the Second Amendment is consistent with a position

that you can take guns away from the public? You can restrict

ownership of rifles, pistols and shotguns from all people? Is that the

position of the United States?"

U.S. Department of Justice attorney Meteja: "Yes."

Metaja argued that the Second Amendment only applied to members of the

National Guard.

Judge Garwood: "Is it the position of the United States that persons

who are not in the National Guard are afforded no protections under

the Second Amendment?"

Meteja: "Exactly."

Meteja added that even members of the National Guard had Second

Amendment protection only for guns issued or used in the Guard.

Judge Garwood: "Membership in the National Guard isn't enough? What

else is needed?"

Meteja: "The weapon in question must be used in the National Guard."

Metaja further argued that the federal government had the right to

regulate guns and gun ownership because of the interstate commerce

clause of the Constitution. Because a firearm may have once traveled

across state lines, the government presumes a gun is somehow involved

in "interstate commerce," thus giving the federal government

regulatory power over it.

In response, Judge DeMoss asked, "I have a 16-gauge shotgun in my

closet at home. I have a 20-gauge shotgun. I also have a 30-caliber

rifle at home. Are you saying these are 'in or affecting interstate

commerce?'"

Meteja: "Yes."

Witnesses say the judges seemed very unimpressed with the federal

government's arguments. At one point, Judge Robert M. Parker

commented: "You shouldn't let it bother your sleep that Judge Garwood

and I, between us, own enough guns to start a revolution in most South

American countries."

A ruling can come any time this year, with the potential to propel the

issue -including the key question of whether the Second Amendment does

in fact protect an individual right to keep and bear arms -- into the

Supreme Court.

(Sources: Neal Knox/Shotgun News; Tom Gresham; WorldNetDaily.com)

"The Constitution shall never be construed..."

"[T]he said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize

Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of

conscience; or to prevent the people of the United who are

peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms..."

-- Samuel Adams, 1788.

* * *

"Good News, Bad News, Unbelievable News" writer James W. Harris is

co-editor of the Liberator Online. His articles have appeared in

numerous magazines and newspapers, including The Nation, Reason, The

Freeman, the National Taxpayers Union's Dollars and Sense, the Atlanta

Constitution, and many more. He has been a Finalist in the Mencken

Awards, given by the Free Press Association for "Outstanding

Journalism in Support of Liberty."

_________________________________________________________________ <snip yet again>

See you in two weeks! You can contact the Advocates at:

Snail Mail:

Advocates for Self Government

1202 N. Tennessee St. Suite 202

Cartersville, GA 30120

Phone: 770-386-8372; for orders, 800-932-1776

Fax: 770-386-8373

Email: mailto:advocates at self-gov.org

WWW: http://www.self-gov.org/

If you wish to subscribe, unsubscribe, or change your address for

receiving the Liberator OnLine, visit:

http://www.self-gov.org/liberator/maintain.html

You can see back issues of the Liberator OnLine on the Advocates' web

site: http://www.self-gov.org/liberator/

The Advocates for Self-Government is a non-profit educational

organization. Our purpose is to present the freedom philosophy

honestly and persuasively to opinion-makers so that they can

encounter, evaluate, and when ready, embrace the ideals of

self-government.

Contributions are tax deductible under Section 501(c)(3) of the IRS

code. If you would like to support the Advocates, we *welcome* your

donation. To support the Advocates' work, see

http://www.self-gov.org/donate.html -- or give us a call at

1-800-932-1776.

"May it be to the world... to assume the blessings and security of

self-government." -- Thomas Jefferson



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list