The 2nd Amendment -- Not a 2nd-class Right
I was in a meeting this morning in the Hart Senate building. Many Senate offices are represented in this meeting as well as many conservative lobby groups and nonprofits. In this particular meeting this week, the two central issues were gun control, as four bills were voted down in the Senate yesterday (June 20), and PROMESA (Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act), which essentially brings up the issue of a federal bailout for Puerto Rico and what this may mean for future state bailouts.
The left has advocated for more regulated gun control measures in the wake of the Orlando shooting. During the meeting, several men presented their unique perspectives on gun control and the residual effects if some of these measures were ever to be carried out. I am sure that most, if not everyone, in this predominately Conservative meeting would agree on the purpose of the Second Amendment—the right for a citizen to defend himself from those who would harm him and to defend himself from the government if necessary—and also agree that this is a right to be protected.
One of the larger concerns to me, however, is the current Administration’s use of the “Terrorist Watch List” or the “No-fly List.” The driving theme behind this list is that the Administration has relegated the Second Amendment right to a second class right. No longer is the Second Amendment considered a basic American right; the right to defend one’s home with a firearm is now a right being questioned by the government, which means the government determines on its own who should have this right.
The government has been adding many more jobs to its job description lately.
Since when is it the federal government’s job to classify rights? Will restricting Second Amendment rights lead to a rights classification system? Should the government be allowed to dictate who has the right to vote, right to like, right to pursue happiness, etc.?
Who gets to decide what defines a terrorist? Hello, due process, anyone??
Of course I don’t want terrorists to have firearms, who does (well, besides terrorist groups, obviously)?
Anyway, a “No-fly List” may not be so bad; but based on my previous questions, this list seems to reflect a paranoid Administration.
In summary, this bulleted list demonstrates the obvious issues I have with the Administration’s current “No-fly List” process:
The left has advocated for more regulated gun control measures in the wake of the Orlando shooting. During the meeting, several men presented their unique perspectives on gun control and the residual effects if some of these measures were ever to be carried out. I am sure that most, if not everyone, in this predominately Conservative meeting would agree on the purpose of the Second Amendment—the right for a citizen to defend himself from those who would harm him and to defend himself from the government if necessary—and also agree that this is a right to be protected.
One of the larger concerns to me, however, is the current Administration’s use of the “Terrorist Watch List” or the “No-fly List.” The driving theme behind this list is that the Administration has relegated the Second Amendment right to a second class right. No longer is the Second Amendment considered a basic American right; the right to defend one’s home with a firearm is now a right being questioned by the government, which means the government determines on its own who should have this right.
The government has been adding many more jobs to its job description lately.
Since when is it the federal government’s job to classify rights? Will restricting Second Amendment rights lead to a rights classification system? Should the government be allowed to dictate who has the right to vote, right to like, right to pursue happiness, etc.?
Who gets to decide what defines a terrorist? Hello, due process, anyone??
Of course I don’t want terrorists to have firearms, who does (well, besides terrorist groups, obviously)?
Anyway, a “No-fly List” may not be so bad; but based on my previous questions, this list seems to reflect a paranoid Administration.
In summary, this bulleted list demonstrates the obvious issues I have with the Administration’s current “No-fly List” process:
- The Administration’s lack of transparency on how someone gets on this list
- The near-impossibility of taking one’s name off the list
- The lag time after one’s name is taken off and the watch period before he is officially not a suspicious individual
(June 2016)
Comments
Post a Comment