From Federal Register: December 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 241)
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 75615-75645]
II.C.6: Security Requirements:
Additionally, nearly all courts have also held that the Second Amendment is a collective right, rather than a personal right. Therefore, despite the Second Amendment collective right to bear arms, the FAA has the authority to prohibit firearms on launch and reentry vehicles for safety and security purposes.From Laura Montgomery
Senior Attorney
Office of the Chief Counsel
Federal Aviation Administration:
This rule, including its security requirements, underwent coordination and review within the executive branch. It was reviewed and approved by the Executive Office of the President.From "President George W. Bush Speaks On The Record":
NRA: Also early on in your Administration, Attorney General John Ashcroft stated his view "that the text and the original intent of the Second Amendment clearly protect the right of individuals to keep and bear firearms." This was a clear reversal, was it not, of the Clinton Administration's position?
President Bush: It was a clear reversal. It was a position that needed to be reversed--—the prior Administration had taken the position that the Second Amendment only applies to state militias and doesn'’t protect an individual right to bear arms. My opponent issued a press release earlier this year supporting that exact same position. I know that'’s not what the Constitution says. The Constitution gives people a personal right to bear arms. So we did reverse the Clinton Administration'’s position, and I think that was the right thing to do.
Mr. President, is it still "the right thing to do"? Clearly, the language that the Senior Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel for the FAA says was "reviewed and approved by the Executive Office of the President" directly contradicts your earlier stated position.
Some have suggested this is merely a bureaucratic oversight--a staffer issuing routine approval without a meticulous detail check and without your cognizance. Others fear it may signal a change in your administration's official position on the Second Amendment.
If it's the former, will you take immediate steps to revise the Final Rule and delete all references to "collective rights," as well as establish controls to prevent such oversights from happening in future rulemaking?
If it's the latter, will you issue a public explanation of your new position and the reasons behind it?
Your immediate attention and personal response to this matter will be appreciated.
Sincerely,
David Codrea
Citizen
CC: Laura Montgomery
------------
Related Reading:
Further Thoughts on the Bush 2A Reversal
Bush Administration Reverses Ashcroft Interpretation of 2A
Bush Administration Declares 2A a "Collective Right"
FAA to Disarm Universe
Other Links
6 comments:
Excellent letter, David. I won't hold my breath waiting for a response, but I'll definitely be interested.
Just an addendum: I am and was fully aware of the egregious error Pres. Bush made when he claimed "The Constitution gives people a personal right to bear arms." I intentionally stuck to the topic at hand in order to keep the letter focused on its goal--a rescinding of the "collective rights" language.
45superman: Thanks. No, by all means, don't hold your breath. I hope you and others DO get involved. Send the White House an email or letter of your own. Post about this on your own blogs, and ask friends with blogs to post their own comments. Send a link to interested friends.
But you might want to stay off the forums :)
Here's a guarantee: if it's just me making noise, this will die a lonely, silent death. If everyone who agrees with the letter just takes one minute to send a brief, focused email to the White House (President@whitehouse.gov; comments@whitehouse.gov ), our chances of a response will increase exponentially.
The goal is to have the offensive language repealed. It would be a small but noteworthy victory if we could demonstrate that citizen activism originating from such humble beginnings could effect even a symbolic change like this quickly at the highest level.
Sent the email. We'll see.
Linked to all;
It ALL started out like this;
I sent Mine:
------Original Message----
To the Honorable George W. Bush, President, United States of America.
Dear Mr. President,
I am writing to you in the hope that you will clarify your position regarding the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution vis a vie the recent ruling by the FAA that the right to keep and bear arms is in fact a collective right assigned to militias and not an individual right of the people.
I trust that the FAA interpretation is not in accordance with your administration’s position on the 2nd Amendment.
FAA and Administration Conflicting Positions Follow:
I.
4910-13 14 CFR Part 460.53 Security.
Docket # FAA-2005-23449; Notice # 05-17
RIN# 2120-AI57
Subject Human Space Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants
“An operator must implement security requirements to prevent any space flight participant from jeopardizing the safety of the flight crew or the public. A space flight participant may not carry on board any explosives, firearms, knives, or any other weapons.”
II.
[Federal Register: December 15, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 241)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 75615-75645]
“6. Security Requirements
The FAA requires an operator to implement security requirements to prevent any space flight participant from jeopardizing the safety of
the flight crew or the public. As in the NPRM, under Sec. 460.53, a space flight participant may not carry on board any explosives, firearms, knives, or other weapons. XCOR inquired whether the FAA had the authority to impose security requirements under its statute and the U.S. Constitution. The Second Amendment to the Constitution provides 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.'' This right is not unfettered. Nearly every statute restricting the right to bear arms has been upheld. For example, in 1958, Congress made it a criminal offense to knowingly carry a firearm onto an airplane engaged in air transportation. 49 U.S.C. 46505. Additionally, nearly all courts have also held that the Second Amendment is a collective right, rather than a personal right. Therefore, despite the Second Amendment collective right to bear arms, the FAA has the authority to prohibit firearms on launch and reentry vehicles for safety and security purposes.”
III.
This section
“Additionally, nearly all courts have also held that the Second Amendment is a collective right, rather than a personal right. Therefore, despite the Second Amendment collective right to bear arms, the FAA has the authority to prohibit firearms on launch and reentry vehicles for safety and security purposes.”
This is a direct contradiction of the administration’s stated position on the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America given by the then Attorney General John Ashcroft.
Excerpt:
“While some have argued that the Second Amendment guarantees only a “collective” right of the States to maintain militias, I believe the Amendment’s plain meaning and original intent prove otherwise. Like the First and Fourth Amendments, the Second Amendment protects the rights of “the people” which the Supreme Court has noted is a term of art that should be interpreted consistently throughout the Bill of Rights. United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259, 265 (1990) (plurality opinion). Just as the First and Fourth Amendment secure individual rights of speech and security respectively, the Second Amendment protects an individuals right to keep and bear arms. This view of the text comports with the all but unanimous understanding of the Founding Fathers.”
IV.
You yourself upheld the individual rights position in 2004 when asked to affirm Attorney General Ashcroft’s position.
Q: NRA. Also early on in your Administration, Attorney General John Ashcroft stated his view "that the text and the original intent of the Second Amendment clearly protect the right of individuals to keep and bear firearms." This was a clear reversal, was it not, of the Clinton Administration's position?
A: President Bush “It was a clear reversal. It was a position that needed to be reversed—the prior Administration had taken the position that the Second Amendment only applies to state militias and doesn’t protect an individual right to bear arms. My opponent issued a press release earlier this year supporting that exact same position. I know that’s not what the Constitution says. The Constitution gives people a personal right to bear arms. So we did reverse the Clinton Administration’s position, and I think that was the right thing to do.”
V.
When questions regarding the wording of the rule were put to the FAA the following response was given by Laura Montgomery, Senior Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration.
She said: “This rule, including its security requirements, underwent coordination and review within the executive branch. It was reviewed and approved by the Executive Office of the President.”
Mr. President, please clarify your administration’s position on this issue. Do you in-fact consider the Bill of Rights specifically the 2nd Amendment in this case to “collective” or individual rights?
Respectfully,
-----------
We shouldn't be surprised that Bush doesn't regard the second amendment as guaranteeing an individual right. After all, when he signed MeCain-Feingold, he was clearly indicating that he didn't consider the first amendment to guarantee an individual right, either.
Post a Comment