11/15/2011

Newest piece at Fox News: "What's Wrong With Making It Easier to Carry a Gun Across State Lines?"

My newest piece at Fox News starts this way:

Congress is expected to vote Tuesday on whether concealed carry gun licenses should be treated the same way we treat driver's licenses for cars. With 245 co-sponsors in the House, the only question is whether there are the 290 votes necessary to override President Obama's veto.
For decades, treating licenses for guns like those for cars was something that gun control advocates wanted.
In his 2000 presidential campaign, Al Gore promised: "We require a license to drive a car in this nation in order to keep unsafe drivers off the road. As president, I will fight for a national requirement that every state issue photo licenses [for handgun buyers]. We should require a license to own a handgun so people who shouldn't have them, can't get them."
Handgun Control Inc., as well as its later incarnation as the Brady Campaign, has pushed licensing plan since the 1970s. But what would this actually mean for gun control? After all, what does a driver's license let you do?
You don't need a driver's license to drive a car on private property, merely on public roads. And once you get a license, you are allowed to drive any car on any public road anywhere in the United States. You are responsible for obeying the different traffic regulations in different states, but as long as you do, you are fine. . . .

Labels:

2 Comments:

Blogger Angela said...

But why would any conservative support giving the federal government a brand new power? This bill overrides state sovereignty, applying the Commerce Clause to licensing issues?

And they won't use it against us?

Seriously?

11/16/2011 5:46 PM  
Blogger Martin G. Schalz said...

I do not see this as an 'Brand New Power', Angela.

The Second Amendment is quite clear about our right to keep and bear arms. The 14th Amendment says this; 'No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;' (Section 1, second clause).

As for an override of 'state sovereignty', that also is not true, as the 14th prevents states from denying citizens from exercising their rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. Also, one must look to the 10th Amendment 'The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.'

As far as the commerce clause goes, the Federal government has abused it to the point of making it a weapon to deny we the people our God given rights as expressed by our founding fathers.

POTUS, SCOTUS, and Congress have deliberately ignored the Constitution in order to further personal and ideological agendas instead of maintaining rigid adherence to the Constitution, which is what should have been done all along.

If one looks at Marbury v Madison, one will note that all firearms laws we have on the books are null, yet we still fail to punish those who try to destroy us.

Yes, they will use whatever excuse possible to give themselves what they percieve as power, all while denying us our rights.

11/18/2011 1:24 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home