Democrats may stand in Obama's way on gun measures

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Res Novae Ashburn, VA
    Jan. 28, 2013 9:17 a.m.

    The Militia Act of 1792 was a two part series of laws conscripting able-bodied males into militias and empowering the federal government to use the militias as a defense against foreign invasions, Indian attacks, and armed rebellions (bear in mind Shays Rebellion 5 years earlier).

    It was superseded by the Militia Act of 1903, which folded the militia system into the National Guard.

    Beyond the fact that it is no longer in effect, I see nothing in it empowering the private arming of individuals. It is a draft that does not arm individuals to protect them from the government, but has as a stated purpose the suppression of armed rebellion. This is entirely consistent with a reading of the Second Amendment as intended to pertain to well-regulated militias rather than a nation of Wyatt Earps.

    Wanna use the Act to justify shooting guns? Join the National Guard. Wanna use your weapons to overthrow a tyrannical government? The Militia Act of 1792 makes *you* the enemy and gives the governmnent the right to raise troops to crush you.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 8:08 p.m.

    Feinstein said it will pass because the people support it. If the people support it, why is it in question?

    Of course, the people opposed obamacare before the dems ram-rodded it through with back room deals, bribery, and graft, so we know they have a history of forcing bad legislation on us despite our screaming NO!!! at the top of our lungs. Hopefully the repubs can stand firm and protect us from the dems.

  • The Skeptical Chymist SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 7:53 p.m.

    Those who remember the "shall not be infringed" part of the Second Amendment, all conveniently seem to forget the "well-regulated" part of the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment certainly permits the regulation of firearms - that was stated explicitly in Justice Scalia's majority opinion in the District of Columbia vs. Heller case. I quote from the court ruling:

    "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

    There is nothing in President Obama's gun proposals that is remotely unconstitutional.

  • Phillip M Hotchkiss Malta, Mt
    Jan. 27, 2013 5:49 p.m.

    Thank you DN Subscriber 2
    @ Kalindra also if you go to google and and that directive was to All freeman

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    Jan. 27, 2013 2:34 p.m.

    Who are republicans planning on aiming these guns at if the USA "declines" any further from their ideal?

    You vote, you don't shoot your way in a democracy.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 27, 2013 12:56 p.m.

    @Kalindra--- I am anxiously waiting for your response on "it never existed".

  • JSB Sugar City, ID
    Jan. 27, 2013 10:55 a.m.

    Gun control legislation is like putting a band-aid on a compound fracture; we might feel like some good is being accomplished, but it won't change the amount of gun or any other kind of violence. The problem is a sick, violent and dangerous society that is getting worse. As our society continues to crumble, the need for responsible people to have guns for their own protection increases. Limiting access to guns just makes responsible people more vulnerable.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 9:16 a.m.

    "Never let a crisis go to waste" is the strategy of the gun banning liberals, urged on by good intentions, but a stubborn refusal to look at facts and accept reality.

    @ Kalindra- The law is the Militia Act of 1792 which required all able bodies males aged 18 to 45 to possess arms (defined to be comparable to the standard military arms of the era). This was passed by the Second Congress, Session I. Chapter XXVIII on May 2, 1792,

    @ Old Switchero- Obama's front person on gun grabbing is Sen. Feinstein who stated in 1995 that she "would take them all, every one of them" if she could get the votes. It is prudent to believe your enemies when they tell you what they want to do, be they politicians, or Muslim terrorists.

    By the way, Feinstein's bill exempts retired cops from all the restrictions, so "elite" people can be trusted with evil killing machines, but mere citizens cannot. Some people truly "are more equal than others." And, Feinstein is one of the few Californians well connected enough to have a permit to carry a gun for self defense... but she won't trust other law abiding citizens.

  • My2Cents Taylorsville, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 7:09 a.m.

    The law requiring gun owner ship is a city/state law in Texas not a federal or constitutional reference.

    However there is reference in the constitution that all americans (citizens only) should be obligated to participate in national defense and the militia but for religious and personal beliefs it is not a mandate or law. The militia is considered armed civil non military persons by law but another law creating the National Guard units took the term militia to mean part time military to justify its creation.

    Furthermore, the National Guard is the property of the states they reside in and federally funded to buy and maintain military training, weapons, and gear. The president does not control or own the NG and must request that a state Governor to call in his NG militia to support a declared war by congress. In the last 40-50 years of war no governor has been obligated to draft the militia into war becasue congress has never delcared them wars. Billions of dollars economic windfall supersedes the constitution, democracy, peace, and legal wars.

    But states are under threat of federal funding boycotts if they don't comply with political war machine demands.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 27, 2013 2:37 a.m.

    It's going to be compromised down to the background checks on all gun purchases thing which has 80% approval with the public AND over 70% approval among NRA members. In my opinion that's the most important thing to address anyway. I'd be fine with it if that's the only thing we got out of it for new gun safety regulations.

  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 26, 2013 11:34 p.m.

    Republicans, speculating on the actions of Democrats.

    I thought guns didn't kill people?

    Isn't that why people are trying to ban video games?

  • Phillip M Hotchkiss Malta, Mt
    Jan. 26, 2013 9:28 p.m.

    @ kalindra. It was a law at one time Joseph Smith wrote about it in one of his letters ,If I can find it i will share the source

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 26, 2013 9:21 p.m.

    Why send weapons to other countries, then deny it to our citizens?

  • Kalindra Salt Lake City, Utah
    Jan. 26, 2013 9:03 p.m.

    maybe the reason no one can find that law is because it never existed.

  • Phillip M Hotchkiss Malta, Mt
    Jan. 26, 2013 7:50 p.m.

    At one time in US history is was mandatory for all male Adults of a certin age to own and know how to fire their wepons.It would be great if some one can still find that law in the books and force it. but I think they took that law off the books when they started the national G. I dont care for some of the Wepons they want to ban, But I think if it was to baned it should be by the voice of the people.

  • Phillip M Hotchkiss Malta, Mt
    Jan. 26, 2013 7:40 p.m.

    @ Lightening Lad
    I agree with Mountanman and worf.
    I do not see how they are "threatening the federal government "
    what they are doing is called freedom of speech" I also do not see them
    " shooting off because no one knows who you are?" anymore then you are .

  • 3grandslams Iowa City, IA
    Jan. 26, 2013 7:30 p.m.

    The right to bear arms, "shall not be infringed". Gun control is clearly unconstitutional. Criminal control isn't. The 2nd amendment is for citizens to have protection against it's own government. Stop talking about hunting and talk the real issues.

  • m.g. scott LAYTON, UT
    Jan. 26, 2013 4:53 p.m.

    I do hope that the Democrats put themselves into this gun issue. It will divide their party just like abortion has divided the Republicans. I thought for sure that the Democrat Party had universally said no to any action against gun owners/2nd Amendment issues. However with the recent shootings, they have been dragged into it. This could spell trouble in some Senate races for the Democrats coming in (yes, believe it or not) less than 2 years. If the Republicans can hold the House, and take the Senate, or even narrow the gap by a few seats, then we can put good old Obama into the lame duck catagory and breath a sigh of relief that his last 2 years will be as powerless as Bushs last 2 were.

  • Lightening Lad Austin , TX
    Jan. 26, 2013 4:03 p.m.

    Worf and mountainman are you threatening the federal government or just shooting off because no one knows who you are?

  • the old switcharoo mesa, AZ
    Jan. 26, 2013 3:37 p.m.

    Obama hasn't suggested a ban on all guns. Why do people insist on being melodramatic?

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    Jan. 26, 2013 2:24 p.m.


    Banning alchohol led to people like Al Capone coming into power.

    Banning Marijuana has led to an over crowded prison system. The only reason there is a marijuana ban is because the federal government is profiting from it.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 26, 2013 1:45 p.m.


    * alcohol
    * marijuana
    * illegals
    * uninsured motorists

    Go on!! Make my day.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Jan. 26, 2013 1:16 p.m.

    We need restrictions on Obama,--not guns.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Jan. 26, 2013 12:12 p.m.

    Even Democrats know bad people will never obey any gun law, never have, never will!