Tag Archives: 2A

01.03.13
by

Let’s Repeal the Second Amendment (2013)

TITLE: Let’s Repeal the Second Amendment (2013)
SOURCE: Vanity Fair
AUTHOR(s): Kurt Eichenwald (Wikipedia bio)
URL: http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2013/01/kurt-eichenwald-lets-repeal-second-amendment
BITLY STATS: http://vnty.fr/X3C1x7+
FIELD: Editorial, with references

FINDINGS: 2nd Amendment is a mess grammatically & interpretively through history. “Well Regulated” = “Well Trained”; “Militia” = “Military Group”; State = The individual States, specific subsets of people were, are, & should be denied the right (e.g. mentally ill), thus should be repealed. History of NRA attempts to subvert appropriate limitations of right (e.g. mentally ill). Appropriate to limit the right because times change: e.g. free speech has been limited by regulations on who can use which broadcast frequencies. So, evolution of weaponry creates a state interest in regulation. Proposed replacement amendment: “The people retain the right to keep & bear arms, subject to reasonable restrictions deemed necessary by the Congress & the President to secure the lives & well being of others.” To make this practical, he proposes Liability Insurance for gun owners.

NOTES: List of many mass shootings back to 1984; Supports right to bear arms but advocates repeal/replacement of 2nd amendment; different versions of amendment passed by States vs. Congress; review of SCOTUS opinions; some constitutional analysis/analogy.

TWEETS: https://twitter.com/hospiceman/status/304651020917686272

12.18.12
by

So you think you know the Second Amendment? (2012)

TITLE: So you think you know the Second Amendment (2012)
SOURCE: The New Yorker
AUTHOR: Jeffrey Toobin
URL: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/comment/2012/12/jeffrey-toobin-second-amendment.html
WEB STATS: http://nyr.kr/YeFpsS+

NOTES:

(1) The Second Amendment is not only a matter of law, but a matter of politics. Conservatives put originalism aside to alter a long-held legal interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. (2) The text of the amendment is divided into two clauses and is, as a whole, ungrammatical. (3) Courts have found that the 1st part, the “militia clause,” trumps the 2nd part, the “bear arms” clause. As a result, the 2nd Amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear arms; it did not give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon. This changed after a post-coup d’état-NRA came into the picture in 1977.  A novel interpretation of the 2nd Amendment was then sought, one that gave individuals, not just militias, the right to bear arms. An uphill battle was fought and, eventually, won, but not without brute political force.  It wasn’t until the 2008 case of District of Columbia v. Heller that the Supreme Court fully embraced the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment.

12.16.12
by

No, Really, Regulate the Bullets (2012)

TITLE: No, Really, Regulate the Bullets (2012)
SOURCE: The Atlantic
AUTHOR(S): Philip Bump
LINK: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/12/no-really-regulate-the-bullets/266332/
WEB STATS: https://bitly.com/12uHujs+

NOTES: Highlights number of guns already in circulation, plus growing ability to “3-D print” manufacture guns, and 2nd amendment protection of right to bear arms. Argues that regulating bullets is a logical way to reduce gun violence: limiting bullet supply doesn’t infringe the Constitutional right, and avoids problem of securing or reducing number of guns in circulation.

TWEETS: https://twitter.com/hospiceman/status/304761936724238337

05.15.12
by

Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right (2012)

TITLE: Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right (2012)
SOURCE: The Combating Terrorism Center @ West Point
AUTHOR(S): Arie Perliger
LINK: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/20/far-right-poses-as-much-danger-to-the-u-s-as-radical-islam/
BITLY STATS: http://bit.ly/VeRjmj+

Screen shot 2013-05-17 at 6.28.26 PMRESEARCH QUESTIONS: (1) What are the main current characteristics of the violence produced by the far-right?; (2) What type of far-right groups are more prone than others to engage in violence? How are characteristics of particular far-right groups correlated with their tendency to engage in violence?; and, (3) What are the social and political factors associated with the level of far-right violence?  Are there political or social conditions that foster or discourage violence?

FINDINGS: Three branches of Far-Right Extremism: Racist, Anti-Federalist, Fundamentalist. All three use 2nd amendment to self-justify. Terrorism is an act of symbolic discourse. Ideology and behavior interact within and between three branches. Variability of cause, method of attack, etc. argues for flexible anti-terrorism response. Embracing of far-right ideology by mainstream politicians enhances their sense of legitimacy and empowerment. These factors, not economic disparity, seem to be bigger determinant in far-right violence. Greater community, ethnic, etc. integration an effective technique to combat far-right violence. 42% of violent acts directed against specific human targets.

TWEETS: https://twitter.com/hospiceman/status/304757934443868160