THE LIBERTARIAN ENTERPRISE
Number 703, December 30, 2012
"Put some nice, long, jaggedy teeth in the Bill of Rights"
Why the Feinstein Bill is Anti-Constitutional
Attribute to L. Neil Smith's The Libertarian Enterprise
This note is a companion piece to The Three Pillars of the Second Amendment, by Terence James Mason.
The new Feinstein "Assault Weapons Ban" is Anti-Constitutional in the extreme.
In addition to the violation of the Second Amendment, which is the primary and express purpose of the measure, the Feinstein bill violates numerous other provisions of the Constitution, based on the summary posted on Senator Feinstein's web site web site and web site1 and the additional information posted by the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action. I have not seen the text of the legislation, and have not been able to verify that the full text is available.
In addition to the Second Amendment, the proposed bill violates the following provisions of the Constitution:
In summary, this provision is so Anti-Constitutional in the extreme that, if Senator Feinstein does introduce it as promised early in the coming Session of Congress, she should be impeached and dismissed from that body for violating the trust of the American people, as should any co-sponsors of the proposed legislation, or ultimately any person that votes in its favor. (A definition of impeachable Breach of Trust is included in my essay No Loopholes available on Kindle and Nook.)
The only reason that, under the argument in the companion article The Three Pillars of the Second Amendment, the proposed legislation is not automatically treasonous is that the confiscation of firearms is piecemeal as the current owners die, rather than immediate. However, should the proposed legislation include provisions developed by non-US parties who do not have the best interests of the American people in mind, such a charge might well apply.
1 All web site access 29DEC2012 approximately 1300Z.
Was that worth reading?