ConditionThree
State Pioneer
imported post
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2008&summary=ajr46
Im reading the words. Some of the words please me. But this is a non-binding resolution that does not change the panoply of unConstitutional ordinances, prohibitions, codesand laws governing the ownership, possession, configuration,transportation and use of firearms. In effect, it is nothing more than a test to see where our legislature stands on firearms. Do we really need a recount in California of those who oppose the 2A?
If there were any real chance that the legislature were in support of the 2A as an individual right, then we would certainly see an effort to ensconce a state constitutional amendment drafted to protect ownership and carry. I wonder if there is any real value to spending the time and effort to test the waters with a resolution, when real pro-gunlegislationwould bemired in committee and voted down by a Democrat controlled body.
http://calnra.com/legs.shtml?year=2008&summary=ajr46
Assembly Joint Resolution 46 reads as follows:
WHEREAS, The California State Legislature has consistently supported the civil liberties guaranteed to all American citizens by the federal Bill of Rights; and
WHEREAS, The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights guarantee that "[a] well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed;" and
WHEREAS, The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia have interpreted the Second Amendment to guarantee the individual the private right to keep and bear arms; and
WHEREAS, The United States Supreme Court has agreed to review a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that struck down a ban on the possession of a handgun in the home; and
WHEREAS, Polls have consistently shown that the public views the Second Amendment as guaranteeing the individual the private right to keep and bear arms, the public opposes a handgun ban, and the public supports the right to self defense especially in the home; now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Assembly and the Senate of the State of California, jointly, That the California State Legislature supports the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights and supports the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia; and be it further
Resolved, That the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit copies of this resolution to the President and the Vice President of the United States, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to the Majority Leader of the Senate, and to each Senator and Representative from California in the Congress of the United States.
Im reading the words. Some of the words please me. But this is a non-binding resolution that does not change the panoply of unConstitutional ordinances, prohibitions, codesand laws governing the ownership, possession, configuration,transportation and use of firearms. In effect, it is nothing more than a test to see where our legislature stands on firearms. Do we really need a recount in California of those who oppose the 2A?
If there were any real chance that the legislature were in support of the 2A as an individual right, then we would certainly see an effort to ensconce a state constitutional amendment drafted to protect ownership and carry. I wonder if there is any real value to spending the time and effort to test the waters with a resolution, when real pro-gunlegislationwould bemired in committee and voted down by a Democrat controlled body.