RKBA

[4sooth]

 

[4sooth]

I have full copies of this document--all 170 pages. I will work with anyone wanting a copy. Office Depot charges me $31 to copy and bind these with a clear front and ring binding.

 

[AlexanderA]

A lot has happened since 1982. Relevance?

 

[MEHavey]

See
https://books.google.com/books?id=U...ce=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

It is a remarkable document insofar as contextualizing the mindset we see today. All you have to really do is read Orrin Hatch's intro/ But both the list of Senate committee members and the case law that follows will open your eyes.

 

[hso]

View attachment 943071

Relevance?

Yes, what's the point of posting this. You know what it means, but to the rest of the members this is a blind drive by. Please provide some context explaining why it is appropriate for Activism.

 

[Craig_AR]

Yes, what's the point of posting this.

Well, I have not read it, yet, but I note that one of the committee members who published it was Senator Joseph R Biden, Delaware.

 

[MEHavey]

Until you read it. Don't complain.
But after you do, HERE, you might have a better idea
of both the nation we once were, and are now becoming.

 

[hso]

Until you read it. Don't complain.

There are some simple rules to posting.
One of which is to not post a link without a brief summary or explanation of what you've posted and why it is of interest. That's a fundamental forum courtesy.
In Activism we're supposed to post only 2A related material that promotes RKBA. That's not clear if it is just a blind linked post or, as in this case, just a jpg with no link and no explanation. Yes, the cover image posted says the document is on the RKBA and it is from 1982 and it is from the Constitution Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee, but it gives nothing about what plan supporting RKBA this is used for. You've at least provided a link to a scan of the document, but nothing more that the vague "what we were" and the somewhat insulting "Until you read it. Don't complain." The OP and your post don't provide the needed information on a plan of action for RKBA.

This excerpt of Dennis DeConcini's preface as the ranking minority member of the Judiciary Committee's Constitution Subcommittee from the report summarizes somewhat the reason and content of the document. At the time it was focused on the 1968 Gun Control Act and debate around it and calls to amend it. The final sentence gives us the value today, that the document may be of "great assistance" in debates of the Second Amendment" and a perspective that in 1982 Congress found it worthwhile to prepare a reference document for such a debate.



To that end, how is this 1982 report from the Constitution Subcommittee useful in a plan to support RKBA nearly 40 years later? I'm familiar with the report (I became active in protecting the 2A after the absurd AWB woke many of us up. I studied anything I could get my hands on at the time and this was one of the references I found.) and it provides a good foundation in the arguments for and against the individual right vs. the "collective" right. It can give others that study it a starting place in thoughtful arguments for RKBA instead of the vapid meme based "education" that so many these days stop at. It also gives the pro 2A advocate many good historical references (Hatch provides many in his preface) that can be pointed out. It also serves to point out that the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was only passed after the assassination of President Kennedy, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and candidate Bobby Kennedy, hasn't been amended by Congress and that all subsequent restrictions on RKBA are not by law, but by interpretation in spite of the intense and important debate that Congress has had on RKBA. These are all important points of information for the RKBA advocate and worth providing as a reference here at THR.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...how is this 1982 report from the Constitution Subcommittee useful in a plan to support RKBA nearly 40 years later? I'm familiar with the report (I became active in protecting the 2A after the absurd AWB woke many of us up. I studied anything I could get my hands on at the time and this was one of the references I found.) and it provides a good foundation in the arguments for and against the individual right vs. the "collective" right. It can give others that study it a starting place in thoughtful arguments for RKBA instead of the vapid meme based "education" that so many these days stop at. It also gives the pro 2A advocate many good historical references (Hatch provides many in his preface) that can be pointed out. It also serves to point out that the Gun Control Act of 1968, which was only passed after the assassination of President Kennedy, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and candidate Bobby Kennedy, hasn't been amended by Congress and that all subsequent restrictions on RKBA are not by law, but by interpretation in spite of the intense and important debate that Congress has had on RKBA. ....

Excellent and important points. And I think that someone well educated in the history, both political and judicial, of the RKBA makes a more effective advocate.