NRA Email Alert -- Vote "YES" on 2!! - Page 2
You are Unregistered, please register to use all of the features of FirearmsTalk.com!    
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > NRA Email Alert -- Vote "YES" on 2!!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-19-2012, 06:49 AM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
USEBOTHHANDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ferriday,LA
Posts: 1,332
Liked 650 Times on 368 Posts
Likes Given: 5149

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NRA80 View Post
To the above poster, the wheel is broken. There is no reinvention with the proposed amendment. NRA and pro-gun attorneys across the nation have worked tirelessly to have courts recognize both state and federal right to arms under "strict scrutiny."

Why is Louisiana’s current right to keep and bear arms amendment inadequate?

1.) Because the Louisiana courts have determined that the current right to arms provision deserves the lowest level of review, the provision provides less protection than the Second Amendment itself, rendering Louisiana's constitutional provision meaningless under Heller and McDonald.

2.) According to the Louisiana Supreme Court, "The State of Louisiana is entitled to restrict that right for legitimate state purposes, such as public health and safety. "State v. Blanchard, 776 So.2d 1165, 1168 (La. 2001).

3.) Almost any restriction is upheld by the courts under the *rational basis* standard.

4.) The Louisiana Constitution also expressly allows a future legislature to impose a ban on the carrying of weapons concealed on the person – even in one’s home or on one’s own property.


Will this protect Louisianans Right to Keep and Bear Arms?

1.) Yes. Louisiana is on the verge of passing a historic level of protection for the right to keep and bear arms.

2.) Ironically, the effort is now being opposed by a misinformed few who mistakenly believe the proposed amendment allows for more, not less, gun control.

3.) Make no mistake, the amendment would not only strengthen Louisiana’s current constitutional right to arms, it would provide the strongest protection of the right to keep and bear arms of any jurisdiction in the United States.

4.) Simply put, it is the highest standard of constitutional review available in the United States. Those who believe in the strongest possible protection for the right to arms should enthusiastically vote *Yes* in November.

you know, you keep sayin the same thing over and over again.....regurgitating it, just like an automated system.

MAKE ME UNDERSTAND lawyer/court speak, AND THEN, take that court speak, "dumb it down" for us po, dumb, loosiana rednecks," and PUT THAT LANGUAGE, AND ONLY THAT LANGUAGE INTO THE AMENDMENT. that way, EVEN A LAWYER/COURT JUDGE couldn't help but understand HOW TO INTERPRET it, in say 200 years!
__________________
"they may get me in a rush, but not before i turn your head into a canoe....." -Kurt Russell (Wyatt Earp) in Tombstone

"if it was up to me, i'd like to see, this country run,
the way it used to be, the way it oughta be, just like it's done, OUT HERE.........WAY OUT HERE." -Josh Thompson, country music singer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0sYnro_3Rc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3R00rlA0S0&NR=1

PEOPLE TEND TO ACT LIKE SHEEP, BOY I LOVE MUTTON! -Me

Last edited by USEBOTHHANDS; 09-19-2012 at 06:57 AM.
USEBOTHHANDS is offline  
2
People Like This 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 12:09 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 14
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by USEBOTHHANDS View Post
you know, you keep sayin the same thing over and over again.....regurgitating it, just like an automated system.

MAKE ME UNDERSTAND lawyer/court speak, AND THEN, take that court speak, "dumb it down" for us po, dumb, loosiana rednecks," and PUT THAT LANGUAGE, AND ONLY THAT LANGUAGE INTO THE AMENDMENT. that way, EVEN A LAWYER/COURT JUDGE couldn't help but understand HOW TO INTERPRET it, in say 200 years!
Lets take the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (Note: the proposed amendment only deals with state-level protections). The Second Amendment itself is very easy to understand -- as you and I agree.

It took the courts 200 years to agree that the Second Amendment protected a "fundamental" and "individual" right. With that said, the courts have been unwilling to agree that this individual and fundamental right deserves the same level of protection as other (e.g. speech and voting rights) fundamental rights.

As you may know, the landmark Second Amendment cases -- Heller and McDonald -- did not settle on a level of protection. However, they did say that the lowest level of protection (rational basis), could not protect a "fundamental" right. As we've discussed, this is the current level of protection for Louisiana's right to keep and bear arms provision.

So, the proposed amendment, for state-level protections resolves this problem and requires the state courts view the right to arms as fundamental and with the highest level of protection.

It is important to note that under the current provision or the new provision -- the legislature can pass any law they choose. The judicial branch (courts) is the body that determines if said laws are constitutional. As you may know, currently there are a number of rights infringing laws on the books now: age restrictions, campus carry bans, prohibitions on where you can carry, registration, etc. -- all of these passed with the current provision in the constitution. Further, the Louisiana courts threw aside the state provision when NRA sued the city of New Orleans in the aftermath of Katrina.

If someone decided to challenge the current laws with the current provision, the laws would likely be upheld because of the low level of protection.

Under the new provision, you put the burden on the government -- you return protection to the people. You see the second sentence of the provision removes the interpretation that has weakened the current provision. The second sentence provides "the teeth."

While legislators themselves are sworn to uphold and protect the constitution, ultimately, "we the people" need to be vigilant every election cycle.

Last edited by NRA80; 09-19-2012 at 12:15 PM.
NRA80 is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 04:32 PM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 12
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steve4102 View Post
I still want to know why the language regarding "restrictions". Your explanation is unclear and vague.

"Any Restrictions shall be scrutinized" is bad language and open for interpretation.

If the Bill is as good as you say it is with your long winded post, why not just eliminate the "restriction" language, or simply right any and all restrictions will be unenforceable and in Violation of this Amendment.

"Scrutinized" has no business in a Constitutional Amendment.

I would still like to know, WHO is to do this "scrutinizing"? The courts, the same courts that are over run with left wing activists. The same ones that have filed injunctions on every attempt to show voter ID, etc.etc.etc.

Your Bill needs work and as it is written will do just the opposite as it was intended.
Removing the restrictions language would be a mistake. This amendment recognizes that future legislatures will pass legislation affecting the right to keep and bear arms. This is inevitable because legislators do not believe they are limited in what they can legislate. Courts will inevitably be requested to review legislation to determine its constitutionality. The second sentence of the amendment instructs courts to use the highest standard of review to determine whether the restriction is constitutional. Since Louisiana courts have traditionally used the lowest standard of constitutional review when determining the constitutionality of firearms restrictions, any amendment directing them to use a higher standad is better for gun owners.

This is no longer a bill, it is a proposed constitutional amendment. It cannot be changed only voted for or against as is.

The proposed amendment will do exactly as it is intended. It will strengthen the right to keep and bear arms in Louisiana.

Dan Zelenka
President
Louisiana Shooting Association
DZelenka is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 04:43 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 12
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by USEBOTHHANDS View Post
the point is, "strict scrutiny" IS STILL backdoor, legal terminology allowing for the ability of a legislator to make a case AGAINST my state citizens' to keep and bear arms!

WHATEVER THIS LAW DOES NOT MEAN, IS IRRELEVANT!!!

Amendment II
"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."

the wording WAS contemplated by the founding FATHERS, and IS worded as such, so as NOT EVER TO BE MISCONSTRUED TO MEAN SOMETHING "OTHER" THAN THAT!

"the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to KEEP and BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

IT CANNOT GET ANY MORE PLAIN, CLEAR, OR DEFINED!

lawyer speak is with a forked tongue, only to make political or monetary gain.
Strict scrutiny is a legal term that refers to the highest standard of constitutional review. It has nothing to do with legislators and can in no way create a "back door" for a legislator to restrict the right to keep and bear arms. By instructing courts to use the strict scrutiny standard, this amendment instructs them to limit the legislature's power to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms to the greatest extent possible.

This is a state constitutional amendment and has noting to do with the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution other than relating to the same subject matter. However, if the language of the 2nd Amendment is so clear, why has no court applied a strict scrutiny level of review to any law that infringes on the right it protects?

The language of the amendment is clear and it provides greater protection against state action than the 2nd Amendment provides against state or federal legislation.

Dan Zelenka
President
Louisiana Shooting Association
DZelenka is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 04:51 PM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 12
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axxe55 View Post
NRA80, your proposed amendment is way too complicated and leaves the door wide open to interpretation, that could possibly derail it and have the exact opposite effect. the 2nd amendment is very simple and clear and also to the point that anyone with the least bit of common sense can understand. IMO, you're trying to reinvent the wheel, don't it already works just fine the way it is.
This is not correct. The amendment closes the door to interpretation by taking away a court's ability to choose the level of review it wishes to apply to a law affecting gun rights. The amendment cannot have the opposite affect as you suggest. I do agree that the 2nd Amendment is clear to people like you and me. However, it did take 200 years for a court to hold that the language protected an individual right. As to Louisiana laws, the proposed amendment requires the same level of judicial review as freedom of speach or religion. The existing Louisiana Constitutional language does not provide nearly that level of protection for gun owners.

Dan Zelenka
President
Louisiana Shooting Association
DZelenka is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 05:00 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 12
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by USEBOTHHANDS View Post
you know, you keep sayin the same thing over and over again.....regurgitating it, just like an automated system.

MAKE ME UNDERSTAND lawyer/court speak, AND THEN, take that court speak, "dumb it down" for us po, dumb, loosiana rednecks," and PUT THAT LANGUAGE, AND ONLY THAT LANGUAGE INTO THE AMENDMENT. that way, EVEN A LAWYER/COURT JUDGE couldn't help but understand HOW TO INTERPRET it, in say 200 years!
Although I do not understand people's confusion over the proposed language (it is absolutely clear to me), dumbing it down for "po, dumb, loosiana rednecks" would be a mistake. The language as written means something to lawyers and more importantly judges. They will be the ones arguing about it and interpreting it, not the ordinary citizen. restricting a judge's choice of what standard of review he should apply increases the chance that a restrictive law will be declared unconstitutional. This is good for gun owners.

Dan Zelenka
President
Louisiana Shooting Association
DZelenka is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 05:09 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 12
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Now that I have managed to spam this forum with posts, let me introduce myself. I am a practicing attorney and President of the Louisiana Shooting Association www.louisianashooting.com Beginning with the legislation that killed the New Orleans suit against gun manufacturers, I have been involved in writing pro-gun legislation and lobbying for gun rights in Louisiana. I am a competitive shooter and hunter and I run the junior highpower rifle program and team in Louisiana. I also work with local junior shooting programs such as 4H in applying for grants for equipment and ammunition.

I unequivocally support this amendment. As a lawyer, the language is absolutely clear to me. It should also be clear to a judge although that cannot be guaranteed. The language of the amendment is vastly superior to the existing language of the Louisiana Constitution in protecting gun owners from future anti-gun legislative action. This is the most important piece of RKBA legislation in Louisiana history. Please join me in voting YES for Amendment 2 on November 6th.

Also, please visit our website and consider joining the LSA.

Dan Zelenka
President
Louisiana Shooting Association
www.louisianashooting.com
DZelenka is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 05:53 PM   #18
Dispossessed Mechwarrior.
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TDS92A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Southern Alabama or Northern Florida, the jury is still out.
Posts: 2,321
Liked 1641 Times on 956 Posts
Likes Given: 4043

Default

First of all WELCOME to the Forum!!

Second, HOT DAMN!!! Someone that speaks Lawyer!! Nothing but respect!

Third, I cannot vote in Louisiana.......I live in Florida, but I still support this action. Now to find out what Florida's Constitution says.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DZelenka View Post
Now that I have managed to spam this forum with posts, let me introduce myself. I am a practicing attorney and President of the Louisiana Shooting Association www.louisianashooting.com Beginning with the legislation that killed the New Orleans suit against gun manufacturers, I have been involved in writing pro-gun legislation and lobbying for gun rights in Louisiana. I am a competitive shooter and hunter and I run the junior highpower rifle program and team in Louisiana. I also work with local junior shooting programs such as 4H in applying for grants for equipment and ammunition.

I unequivocally support this amendment. As a lawyer, the language is absolutely clear to me. It should also be clear to a judge although that cannot be guaranteed. The language of the amendment is vastly superior to the existing language of the Louisiana Constitution in protecting gun owners from future anti-gun legislative action. This is the most important piece of RKBA legislation in Louisiana history. Please join me in voting YES for Amendment 2 on November 6th.

Also, please visit our website and consider joining the LSA.

Dan Zelenka
President
Louisiana Shooting Association
www.louisianashooting.com
__________________
The difficult I do immediately, the impossible takes me a few minutes longer.
NRA, U.S. Army (Ret), AGA, F&AM
A Person has to stand for something, or they will fall for anything.
How different the new order would be if we could consult the Veteran instead of the Politician - Henry Miller
The Soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war. - Gen. Douglas MacArthur
TDS92A is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 06:02 PM   #19
Dispossessed Mechwarrior.
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
TDS92A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Southern Alabama or Northern Florida, the jury is still out.
Posts: 2,321
Liked 1641 Times on 956 Posts
Likes Given: 4043

Default

I know that we are commenting on the Bill in Louisiana, but this is what Florida's says:

SECTION 8. Right to bear arms.—(a) The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and of the lawful authority of the state shall not be infringed, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law.
(b) There shall be a mandatory period of three days, excluding weekends and legal holidays, between the purchase and delivery at retail of any handgun. For the purposes of this section, “purchase” means the transfer of money or other valuable consideration to the retailer, and “handgun” means a firearm capable of being carried and used by one hand, such as a pistol or revolver. Holders of a concealed weapon permit as prescribed in Florida law shall not be subject to the provisions of this paragraph.
(c) The legislature shall enact legislation implementing subsection (b) of this section, effective no later than December 31, 1991, which shall provide that anyone violating the provisions of subsection (b) shall be guilty of a felony.
(d) This restriction shall not apply to a trade in of another handgun.
History.—Am. C.S. for S.J.R. 43, 1989; adopted 1990.

I do not see anything wrong with this. Comments?
__________________
The difficult I do immediately, the impossible takes me a few minutes longer.
NRA, U.S. Army (Ret), AGA, F&AM
A Person has to stand for something, or they will fall for anything.
How different the new order would be if we could consult the Veteran instead of the Politician - Henry Miller
The Soldier, above all other people, prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war. - Gen. Douglas MacArthur
TDS92A is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-2012, 06:29 PM   #20
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 12
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TDS92A View Post
I know that we are commenting on the Bill in Louisiana, but this is what Florida's says:

SECTION 8. Right to bear arms.—(a) The right of the people to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves and of the lawful authority of the state shall not be infringed, except that the manner of bearing arms may be regulated by law.
(b) There shall be a mandatory period of three days, excluding weekends and legal holidays, between the purchase and delivery at retail of any handgun. For the purposes of this section, “purchase” means the transfer of money or other valuable consideration to the retailer, and “handgun” means a firearm capable of being carried and used by one hand, such as a pistol or revolver. Holders of a concealed weapon permit as prescribed in Florida law shall not be subject to the provisions of this paragraph.
(c) The legislature shall enact legislation implementing subsection (b) of this section, effective no later than December 31, 1991, which shall provide that anyone violating the provisions of subsection (b) shall be guilty of a felony.
(d) This restriction shall not apply to a trade in of another handgun.
History.—Am. C.S. for S.J.R. 43, 1989; adopted 1990.

I do not see anything wrong with this. Comments?
You mean other than the blatant infringements on your right to keep and bear arms? Specifically, it only protects arms borne for the purpose of self defense or defense of the state, not hunting, competition, plinking, etc. It also specifically carves out for the legislature the regulation of concealed carry. Remember that such a carve out would allow a future legislature to ban concealed carry. Finally, it provides for a 3 day waiting period to exercise a constitutional right. Florida's constitution provides less protection than Louisiana's current constitution and we are working to change ours. You should see plenty wrong with the language in the Florida constitution.

Dan
DZelenka is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Should "Assault Weapons" Be Banned (Vote) 10P8TRIOT Legal and Activism 24 08-07-2012 03:27 AM
VOTE! Is books on CD just as good as "reading" DodgerBlue The Club House 18 03-15-2012 10:47 AM
Old Revolver - "Revolvers Dreadnought" - "Azul" - Anyone familiar? stelliott80 Revolver Handguns 3 07-13-2011 10:52 PM
A "what if" vote idea skullcrusher The Club House 9 01-27-2009 10:54 AM
Witloe Remington 1858 New Model Army "Lee" & "Grant" bprevolver Blackpowder & Musket 0 09-25-2008 11:11 PM



Newest Threads