It's not about guns...

It's about citizenship


The Potowmack Institute
4423 LeHigh Road, Suite 273
College Park, MD 20740

potowmack
then
at sign
then
potowmack(dot)org.
leave out then's and spaces.
The e-mail address is presented this way to defeat the spam miscreants

PayPal Paybox


http://www.potowmack.org/snjdcom.html


[PotomackForum], Interactive Posting
[ARCHIVE], Potowmack Institute files
[RESOURCES], Newspaper, magazine, journal articles, books, links

Assaulting Jim Zumbo

The NRA on Extremists

NRA scams its members

The Lionel Show
AirAm Radio's ignorant, crude, ugly,
air waves barbarian
Dear John Ashcroft
The armed populace doctrine at the DOJ
The Washington Post
cultivating ignorance.
Gun Policy News
news stories compiled daily.
"Sixty Minutes"
Failing its Mission
NPR's Diane Rehm
Civilized without Substance.
A longstanding dereliction.
Violence Policy Center
The public health agenda
falls in line with the NRA.
Militia Act of 1792
To enroll— conscript, register— That is,
a coerced civic obligation.
Return of Militia
Inventory of private weapons in
the early Republic reported to the
President of the US
History
John Kenneth Rowland
Lawrence Cress
John K. Mahon
Others
Pseudohistory
LaPierre's list

The Quotes, the Quotes
Fabricating the armed populace doctrine
Libertarians, Conservatives

Tenn. Law Rev., 1995

Chicago-Kent Symposium, 2000
What does the NRA want?

The top of the page:
Parker et al. v. DC Government, March, 2007
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/E23F1D1340E39A99852574400045380B/$file/04-7041a.pdf

The gun lobby, led by the NRA, would fight viciously any legislative attempts to implement Judge Silberman's conclusions.
http://www.nraila.org/news-issues/fact-sheets/2013/privatesales.aspx?s=&st=&ps=


Parker conclusion, p. 54:
"Reasonable restrictions also might be thought consistent with a "well-regulated Militia." The registration of firearms gives the government information as to how many people would be armed for militia service is called up."


January 30, 2013
Message to the Senate Judiciary Committee, some news people and some panelists:

This page was left at offices of most members of the ? Sen. Jud. Com. during the hearings on Jan. 30. No Response. There is no more frightening business to members of congress then their oath of office.

It was also given to Mark Kelly, husband of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords. They want engagement with the public, a national conversation. That was engagement. No response. It was also given to Balto. Co. Chief of Police James Johnson who is chair of the National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence. No response. It was also given to a few reporters and commentators for big name news organs including Dana Milbank. He wrote a silly mockery of LaPierre for the Washington Post the next day.
"At Hill hearing, Wayne LaPierre tries to manhandle facts and logic" Nothing ever changes.

There will be change when we decide and make policy on the premise that the Constitution is a frame of government with "just powers" that derive from the "consent of the governed" not a treaty among sovereign individuals who give no more than word of honor and promise of good faith.

And, when we recognized that what James Madison was really describing in Federalist Paper No. 46 was not a civil right of private individuals.

More at:
Leadership starts at the top. The challenge to Obama:
http://www.potowmack.org/obchall.html
http://www.potowmack.org/index.html
http://www.potowmack.org/indexA.html


The rest of the page:
If the SJC does not know what its opposition wants it is dealing in its own illusions. What the gun rights militants, led by the NRA, want is what the NRA argued to the Sup Ct in Perpich (1990): the right to maintain the militia as the “armed populace at large”, a collection of sovereign individuals who made a treaty not a government, known in other places as “armed citizen guerrillas.” The one point of policy the “armed populace at large” or “armed citizen guerrillas” cannot accommodate is accountability to a governing authority, accountability to the very legitimacy of a governing authority. It is a right, with all its insurrectionist implications, that cannot be had in any viable concept of constitutional government. It has to be had by defeating legislation. The method is demagoguery. The NRA has to make preposterous arguments that appeal to the gallery and fight viciously even the smallest hint of a threat to the “armed populace” doctrine. Once the method is understood everything in gun rights politics becomes clear.

Accountability means specifically registration. LaPierre lists two purposes for registration: 1) taxation 2) confiscation. He does not list the third purpose: conscription, a coerced civic obligation, already manifest in the Militia Act of 1792.

After many pages in Parker (released, March, 2007) that attempted to invent a libertarian right to privacy for gun ownership, Judge Silberman concluded that we can have “registration ... for militia service is called up.” That is the original civic purpose. Nothing in the Sup Ct’s subsequent opinions contradicts that conclusion. Anyone who does not accept the conclusion of the courts has only one choice: to launch a campaign for a constitutional amendment that would repudiate the conclusion of the courts. We need to know how such an amendment would be worded and how it would be handled in the Congress and in 38 state legislatures. We need to know what we are doing here as a political community.

Political community begins with the fundamental fact of political life that the Constitution is a frame of government with just powers that derive from the consent of the governed. It is not a treaty among sovereign individuals who give no more than word of honor and promise of good faith. The rule of law, the state’s monopoly on violence and the state’s internal sovereignty all mean the same thing. There is a difference between political community and the State of Nature which is the state of anarchy as the Founders understood (FP No. 33). The consent to be governed has serious consequences for private gun ownership as the Militia Act of 1792 makes clear. Militia duty in the early Republic was conscript duty. The obvious purpose was military preparedness. It was state based then but became national in the Selective Service Act of 1917, a radical departure from original design and intent and an evolutionary moment into modern nationhood. There is no libertarian right to privacy in a conscript military organization. Just because there is no political or public necessity for state or national conscription today does not mean that the principle does not hold.

An appreciation of the failure of principle, of political knowledge and of political leadership can start right there with the Parker case. The DC gov. had no business taking the Parker case to the Sup Ct. Enough people told it that. It had everything it needed to launch a campaign for a national firearms policy with Judge Silberman’s conclusion.

The only major function of the Fed. Gov. in firearms policy is to control and shut down the illegal traffic between and among jurisdictions. That is empowerment policy for local jurisdictions. That can only be accomplished by registration and reporting of private sales. The courts have opened the path for policy. All that is missing is aggressive political leadership. The best outcome of the present gun control proposals is that they will be defeated in Congress. We might then progress from the failed strategies of “gun control” and “gun safety” to the contours of citizenship under constitutional government. The aggressive political leadership has to start at the top. When present proposals fail and if there is still a political will, President Obama can start with an appeal to gun owners and members of gun rights organizations on where they stand on the anarchic doctrine and what is their conviction to server their country and maintain public order rather than take up arms to act out a childish political fantasy. One constitutional function of the militia is to suppress insurrections— not make them. “Suppress insurrections” is a civic purpose right there in the Constitution.

There are some things we have to get right first. If we can’t get this right and if we have a future, history will judge this moment severely.

Potowmack
http://www.potowmack.org/index.html


[PotowmackForum] interactive posting


[ARCHIVE], Potowmack Institute files
[RESOURCES], Newspaper, magazine, journal articles, books, links

© Potowmack Institute