As a candidate for California Attorney General, I note you have received fairly good grades from both Gun Owners of California and the National Rifle Association over the course of your political career.
You are no doubt aware that the current AG, Bill Lockyer's official position on the Second Amendment is that:
"[It] limits only the powers of the federal government, not those of the states; and the 'right to keep and bear arms' under the Second Amendment is not an individual right to possess firearms, but a collective right of the States to keep and maintain a 'well-regulated militia.'"You also no doubt are aware that this is in direct contradiction to the position taken by former US Attorney General John Ashcroft, who wrote:
"The text and the original intent of the Second Amendment clearly protect the right of individuals to keep and bear firearms."Following Mr. Ashcroft's pronouncement, then Alabama AG Bill Pryor wrote a letter agreeing with the individual rights position, and received signatures of support from 18 other state attorneys general. Furthermore, Dick Ackerman, the candidate for California AG at the time, agreed to also sign the Pryor letter if elected.
If you are elected, per the CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 20, you will take the following oath (or affirmation) of office, which says in part:
I, ______, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter.You are also aware that the Constitution of the United States, Article VI, states:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.So my questions for you, Mr. Poochigian:
If gun owners support your candidacy and you are elected California Attorney General, will you issue an official declaration of position that the Second Amendment recognizes an individual right to keep and bear arms?
And if so, what will you do as the chief law officer in the state to ensure that "the supreme Law of the Land," which you will have taken an oath to support and defend, is enforced, and that the rights of California gun owners are legally protected from infringement?
Mr. Poochigian, California gun owners are having essential freedoms abridged and live in danger of having their lives destroyed by edicts that we believe violate the clear proscription articulated in the Second Amendment. Attempts at obtaining peaceful redress through court actions and petitioning have been in vain. We are watching the upcoming election with desperate interest, as so much is at stake for us. I am therefore making this letter public, and am requesting an answer for public disclosure.
Sincerely,
David Codrea
California gun owner
---------------------
Special note to WarOnGuns visitors: I'm sending Mr. Poochigian a link to this post, and will report his reply or lack of one. The success of getting an answer is really out of my hands, though. If California gun owners don't take the under-1-minute needed to express their expectation that he answer these questions, he'll really have no reason to pay any attention to this. If you don't live in California, please direct your friends who do to this post. If you do live in California, please contact the Poochigian campaign. Here's a link to his contact form.
8 comments:
This may help: Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown ran an attack ad this morning, saying that Pooghigian favors .50 BMG shooters, so, MAYBE, just MAYBE, he's good for gun owners.
Yes, R.J., I covered that here.
But my point is, if Poochigian is elected, so what? Will he go on record supporting an individual rights interpretation of 2A, and will he use his powers a chief law officer of the state to protect our rights?
If not, it's the status quo--that is, continuing to smash in the doors of California gun owners as per this post.
California Attorney General Candidates:
FYI -
“...On motion to amend article the fifth, by inserting these words, 'for the COMMON defence,' next to the words 'bear arms:'
“It passed in the NEGATIVE.
“On motion to strike out of this article, line the second, these words, 'the best,' and insert in lieu thereof 'necessary to the:'
“It passed in the affirmative.
“On motion, on article the fifth, to strike out the word 'fifth,' after 'article the,' and insert 'fourth,' and to amend the article to read as follows: 'A well regulated militia being the security of a free state, the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'
“It passed in the affirmative....”
“...Resolved, That the Senate do concur in the resolve of the House of Representatives, on "Articles to be proposed to the legislatures of the states, as amendments to the constitution of the United States," with the amendments; two thirds of the Senators present concurring therein.
- Journal of the Senate of the United States of America, SEPT. 9, 1789.
That answers some questions, now doesn't it?
Next, was born in San Jose and still have relatives in CA. And, THEY VOTE. So, have some bearing and weight.
So, tell me Mr. Poochigian, what do you think the words 'SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED' mean? And, to whom do they apply?
Are you familiar with the term "Laws of Nature and of Nature's God"? And what American documents are those words set up as standards in or for? Do you know what the First Law of Nature is? And, to whom does it apply?
Do you know the meaning of the following words:
immutable?
unalienable?
inherent?
entitle?
For what purposes were the government(s) in the U.S. instituted?
What is the whole purpose and reasoning for a Constitutional Republic?
What does the term 'Tyranny of the majority' mean?
Why, do you suppose, would Patrick Henry state the following. And more importantly, WHY IS IT BECOMING A REALITY, even with the B.O.R.? -
"The style of the government (We, the people) was introduced perhaps to recommend it to the people at large; to those citizens who are to be levelled and degraded to the lowest degree; who are likened to a herd*; and who, by the operation of this blessed system, are to be transformed from respectable, independent citizens, to abject, dependent subjects or slaves. The honorable gentleman has anticipated what we are to be reduced to, by degradingly assimilating our citizens to a herd."
- The Debates in the Several State Conventions, (Virginia), on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution
[Elliot's Debates, Volume 3]
June 6, 1788.
Whom is the Legitimate and Ultimate Authority?
What should the penalties be for SERVANTS whom are disobedient and BETRAY their masters?
WHY ARE THE LAWS OF THE LAND BEING LAID PROSTRATE AND GIVEN RECKLESS DISREGARD?
And, finally, WHY ARE WE THE PEOPLE IN THE SITUATION WE FIND OURSELVES IN PRESENTLY? AND WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO OFFER TO CORRECT IT?
FYI
I live in ka and I do vote (for what good it does) and I did forward your letter along with my own for a reply.
We'll see.
DL
PS: "Attorney General Moonbeam" give me a break - why don't we just bend over, spread our cheeks and burn the state to the ground now?
I agree, David. All I was saying, is the attack ads give us the possibility that he's good. We still need to know his voting record. Besides, I'm as jaded as you are. The Repubs have lied to us and taken us for granted too often.
I followed the link provided and asked Mr. Poochigian to please respond to your questions.
Thanks for asking a well phrased question, thanks for the link and the forum to try and do something about Kali.
This is by far the best document written as an analysis of the second amendment I have seen. It's by the Department of Justice dated 2004.
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
I think it speaks for itself. There's no other way than to interpret that the second amendment refers to THE PEOPLE.
link fixed:
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
Post a Comment