On 17 Oct 2005 at 14:56, SAF Alerts wrote:
NEWS RELEASE
SAF BLASTS LOUISIANA NEWSPAPER OVER OUTRAGEOUS POSITION ON
CIVIL RIGHTS BELLEVUE, WA – The Baton Rouge Advocate
newspaper's editorial board needs to take a deep breath and
reconsider its willingness to abandon a civil right so easily,
merely on the grounds that an "extraordinary situation" might
arise, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) said today in a
sharply-worded letter to the newspaper. On Monday, the
newspaper editorialized against a move to stop the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) from imposing a gun ban at
an evacuation site outside Baker, LA. The ban was part of the
rules FEMA set down for displaced Hurricane Katrina victims
who are moving into the temporary housing facility. However,
FEMA attorneys began re-evaluating the rules following
inquiries by Gun Week, a newspaper owned by SAF. When SAF
learned of the ban, it threatened legal action. "It seems
rather easy for the newspaper to suggest that a civil right be
surrendered in the interest of a little security," wrote SAF
founder Alan Gottlieb. "I wonder under what so-called
‘extraordinary situation' might the Advocate editors just as
quickly argue that citizens give up their right to free
speech, or a free press. "The right to keep and bear arms
is an individual civil right," Gottlieb said, "protected by
the U.S. Constitution and Louisiana's state constitution, and
recognized as an individual right by the U.S. Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals in New Orleans. Evidently, the Advocate
editors stubbornly disagree, but the Bill of Rights is an
all-or-nothing proposition not subject to the whims of a
newspaper. "Neither SAF, nor any other gun rights
organization, advocates unsafe or irresponsible use of
firearms," Gottlieb stated. "But we will not stand by while a
Washington D.C. bureaucracy, or any local government entity,
presumes to have the authority to suspend a constitutional
right. The New Orleans case, in which we were joined by the
National Rifle Association, shows we're serious about
protecting citizens against illegal search and seizure, and
violations of due process. This isn't just about firearms,
it's about civil rights, and if a newspaper doesn't understand
that, the editors need a refresher course in Journalism.
"Frankly," Gottlieb concluded, "I'm astonished that a
newspaper, which owes its very existence to the First
Amendment, is so quick to consider the Second Amendment
expendable. It is disappointing that the press constantly
fails to see the correlation. If you so easily dismiss one
constitutional right, you might as well dismiss them all."
-END-
< Please e-mail, distribute, and circulate to friends and
family > Copyright © 2005 Second Amendment Foundation, All
Rights Reserved.
Second Amendment Foundation
James Madison Building
12500 N.E. Tenth Place
Bellevue, WA 98005
Voice: 425-454-7012
Toll Free: 800-426-4302
FAX: 425-451-3959
email:
Note to SAF: PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE QUIT CALLING RKBA A "CIVIL
RIGHT".
civÆil rightsÆ, (often caps.)
1. rights to personal liberty established by the 13th and 14th
Amendments to the U.S. Constitution and certain Congressional
acts, esp. as applied to an individual or a minority group.
2. the rights to full legal, social, and economic equality
extended to blacks. [1715–25]
—civÆil-rightsÆ, adj.
huÆman rightsÆ,
fundamental rights, esp. those believed to belong to an
individual and in whose exercise a government may not interfere,
as the rights to speak, associate, work, etc. [1785–95]
RKBA is a HUMAN RIGHT, people, NOT a civil right! There's a huge
difference. Civil rights were GRANTED, human rights are natural
rights that we'd have whether or not there was a Constitution,
but they're RECOGNIZED by the Bill of Rights, which makes them
even more fundamental than civil rights! PLEASE GET IT RIGHT
SAF! ( and everyone else! )
--
Ms Liberty
United States of America
Lenin coined the term "useful idiots" for the morons who could
be used to wage a campaign for socialism, and they're all out in
force, in the form of liberals on usenet.
.
|
