|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 registered members (rhino21, HSV. HUNTER, blade, jw706, Fedex 1, goodman_hunter, JHL, GomerPyle, BearBranch, CeeHawk37, Dean, dave260rem!, Longtine, AustinC, Gulfcoast, trlrdrdave, AU coonhunter, longshot, Pwyse, scrubbuck, 3bailey3, BOFF, Gobble4me757, desertdog, Mansfield, BigA47, 7PTSPREAD, Tree Dweller, AKB, tidenate, 300gr, AlabamaPhi, fish_blackbass, MikeP, slippinlipjr, billrv, JohnG, quailman, CrappieMan, skymech, BrandonClark, Young20, BhamFred, SouthBamaSlayer, 3Gs, sumpter_al, Goose, leroycnbucks, Aldecks1, MoeBuck, TexasHuntress, BPI, IDOT, MCW, Catbird, Turkeyneck78, Overland, coldtrail, HappyHunter, canichols424, Showout, mw2015, Jbf, Colt1917, hillmp, Noler_Swamp, Turkey, sidehitter, Coosa1, Antelope08, BCLC, Paint Rock 00, Okatuppa, Chancetribe, benchmade47, Shmoe, BCD, trailertrash, DGAMBLER, lectrode, BigEd, AlabamaSwamper, wareagul, Bustinbeards, Solothurn, Floorman1, AU338MAG, sj22, Gut Pile 32, ken1970, twaldrop4, bamabug, JEM270, 7 invisible),
846
guests, and 0
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Amendment 3
#1129064
10/29/14 05:36 AM
10/29/14 05:36 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,005 Millbrook, AL
leroyb
OP
8 point
|
OP
8 point
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,005
Millbrook, AL
|
I don't want to hijack the Amendment 5 thread so lets here your thoughts about Amendment 3
Amendment 3 provides that every citizen has the fundamental right under the State Constitution to bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the State. Amendment 3 also provides that this right would be entitled to the highest protection of the law. Amendment 3 also protects a citizen from being compelled by any treaties or laws of another country to take an action which would prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with his or her right to bear arms if that treaty or law would violate the United States Constitution. If Amendment 3 IS PASSED, the right to bear arms will be elevated under the State Constitution to a fundamental right and given the highest possible protection. This right will also be provided with additional protection from potential interference by international treaty or foreign law. If Amendment 3 IS DEFEATED, the right to bear arms in Alabama will still exist in the State Constitution, but it will not be declared a fundamental right and may not be subject to the highest possible protection. The right to bear arms will also not be protected from potential interference by international laws and treaties.
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129085
10/29/14 05:54 AM
10/29/14 05:54 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
I'm concerned about the way it is worded. Strictly read, it says that any infringement on the right to bear arms will be subject to strict judicial scrutiny. I understand that is a legal term with specific implications. And in the current environment that may be fine......but what happens should the court go liberal at some point in the future? Would this be the thing that allows the court to be used to infringe upon our right?
I like "shall not be infringed" better.
I still don't know what to do with this one
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129100
10/29/14 05:58 AM
10/29/14 05:58 AM
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,912 Cullman
CKyleC
(Can't Keep It Up...)
|
(Can't Keep It Up...)
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,912
Cullman
|
I'm voting no on 3 and 5. As I understand it, right now its a right, period, no ifs ands or buts. This changes it to subject to strictest scrutiny, whatever the hell that is.
If I'm wrong, enlighten me.
"In Alabama, we prefer to kill small bucks on big properties"-Turkey247
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129105
10/29/14 06:00 AM
10/29/14 06:00 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899 Huntsville AL
Rocket62
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
|
Amendment 3: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide that every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms and that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny; and to provide that no international treaty or law shall prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with a citizen's fundamental right to bear arms. (Proposed by Act 2013-267) That appears to be adding provisions that would prevent the U.N. from monkeying around with our rights at the state level ... aint that a good thing?
I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129111
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,040 Port St Joe, FL
Moose24
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,040
Port St Joe, FL
|
This is very interesting. I would do some research before you jump on a "Yes" vote. The real kicker that is causing alarm is the wording "....that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny". This wording seems to open the door for rulings affecting our right to bear arms where no such "open door" previously existed. http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/10/proposed_statewide_amendment_3.htmlThis seems like a do-nothing bill that has more of a chance to do harm than good. At this moment I am voting 'NO'.
Last edited by Moose24; 10/29/14 06:05 AM.
The Things You Remember in Life aren't Things at all.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Rocket62]
#1129112
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797 Smith Lake
300Ruger
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797
Smith Lake
|
Amendment 3: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide that every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms and that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny; and to provide that no international treaty or law shall prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with a citizen's fundamental right to bear arms. (Proposed by Act 2013-267) That appears to be adding provisions that would prevent the U.N. from monkeying around with our rights at the state level ... aint that a good thing? I may just not get it. How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened? I agree with the above post - I'm suspicious of the "scrutiny" part.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: johnnyreb]
#1129114
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999 Holly Pond, AL
NightHunter
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999
Holly Pond, AL
|
I'm concerned about the way it is worded. Strictly read, it says that any infringement on the right to bear arms will be subject to strict judicial scrutiny. I understand that is a legal term with specific implications. And in the current environment that may be fine......but what happens should the court go liberal at some point in the future? Would this be the thing that allows the court to be used to infringe upon our right?
I like "shall not be infringed" better.
I still don't know what to do with this one Problem is scrutiny can come from the bench and who wants that? We do not need strict scrutiny from a liberal judge trying to make a name for themselves. We have the second amendment and it works just fine.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: 300Ruger]
#1129132
10/29/14 06:21 AM
10/29/14 06:21 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899 Huntsville AL
Rocket62
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
|
How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened? When Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the U.N. there was a lot of flap about Obama using this to get around the 2nd amendment to curtail private gun ownership. I believe the resolution is that this little trick won't work but ... As long as we have such left minded people running our country who is to say that we won't sign an agreement with the U.N. to limit private gun ownership? Anyway, I was just thinking out loud that maybe this amendment was targeting that possibility ...
I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129158
10/29/14 06:39 AM
10/29/14 06:39 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,620 Alabama
Rmart30
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,620
Alabama
|
Here is a 20 minute podcast with Rep Mike Jones the Pro 2a sponsor of this bill who explains why the bill was introduced and its intent. The host sorta hammers him about adding more amendments etc. He cuts him off for a break but then brings him back to finish the interview.. Host goes a little off topic toward the end but its a good listen. He also goes into what strict scrutiny is and why it was put into it. There are 3 levels of scrutiny in the judicial system.. rational intermediate, and strict with rational being the lowest. Sen Scott Beason also did a interview on this amendment and he was 100% in on it. Beason is about a pro 2a politician as I have met. If there was anything in it that he remotely thought would hurt our 2a rights he would bring it up. http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=1291&c=6311&f=3544613
Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching - even when doing the wrong thing is legal. Aldo Leopold .. (except when it comes to trailer tags)
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Rocket62]
#1129171
10/29/14 06:50 AM
10/29/14 06:50 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,832 Buc-ee’s Beach Express
leroycnbucks
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,832
Buc-ee’s Beach Express
|
How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened? When Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the U.N. there was a lot of flap about Obama using this to get around the 2nd amendment to curtail private gun ownership. I believe the resolution is that this little trick won't work but ... As long as we have such left minded people running our country who is to say that we won't sign an agreement with the U.N. to limit private gun ownership? Anyway, I was just thinking out loud that maybe this amendment was targeting that possibility ... This is what I was thinking and why I would vote yes. Now I'm confused. Somebody please clear this up.
Proud Army and ALNG veteran God Bless America!
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Moose24]
#1129175
10/29/14 06:54 AM
10/29/14 06:54 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,005 Millbrook, AL
leroyb
OP
8 point
|
OP
8 point
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,005
Millbrook, AL
|
This is very interesting. I would do some research before you jump on a "Yes" vote. The real kicker that is causing alarm is the wording "....that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny". This wording seems to open the door for rulings affecting our right to bear arms where no such "open door" previously existed. http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/10/proposed_statewide_amendment_3.htmlThis seems like a do-nothing bill that has more of a chance to do harm than good. At this moment I am voting 'NO'. The fact that the AL.com article is written in support of the amendment is enough to make lean toward voting No.
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129180
10/29/14 07:00 AM
10/29/14 07:00 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,511 sellers, montgomery county
paulfish4570
12 point
|
12 point
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,511
sellers, montgomery county
|
if i am interpreting this correctly, the amendment would require, in effect, the state supreme court to let stand this right no matter the intended interference by any municipal/county agency/government. example: let's say the city of whoville, alabama, passes a city law that would cause an infringement of the state's interpretation of the second amendment, perhaps not allowing semiautomatic rifle/shotgun/pistol ownership in city limits. this city law would not stand strictest scrutiny, and would be struck down by the court.
but, hey, i could be wrong ...
paulfish4570 Joshua 1:9
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129185
10/29/14 07:03 AM
10/29/14 07:03 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
I think that under strict scrutiny it becomes the burden of the state to prove to the court that any infringement is in the clear interest of the public good. If the court went liberal then that might not take much to do.
I could be wrong though. Maybe one of our resident lawyers can explain it to us.
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Rmart30]
#1129186
10/29/14 07:03 AM
10/29/14 07:03 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899 Huntsville AL
Rocket62
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
|
Here is a 20 minute podcast with Rep Mike Jones the Pro 2a sponsor of this bill who explains why the bill was introduced and its intent. The host sorta hammers him about adding more amendments etc. He cuts him off for a break but then brings him back to finish the interview.. Host goes a little off topic toward the end but its a good listen. He also goes into what strict scrutiny is and why it was put into it. There are 3 levels of scrutiny in the judicial system.. rational intermediate, and strict with rational being the lowest. Sen Scott Beason also did a interview on this amendment and he was 100% in on it. Beason is about a pro 2a politician as I have met. If there was anything in it that he remotely thought would hurt our 2a rights he would bring it up. http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=1291&c=6311&f=3544613 Well I listened to it in full and I'm still confused ... Not sure I like Mike Jones' logic about carrying in the state legislature.
I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129197
10/29/14 07:15 AM
10/29/14 07:15 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,668 Central Alabama
QDMAV8R
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,668
Central Alabama
|
Careful what you vote for: The litmus test should be as simple as this: Have you lost any rights under the present constitution as written? YES- then vote to change the wording. NO-then don't give them the opporunity to change anything!
"Never met a deer that I didn't like" - QDMAV8R
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: paulfish4570]
#1129205
10/29/14 07:19 AM
10/29/14 07:19 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 15,862 Elmore County
Frankie
Old Mossy Horns
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 15,862
Elmore County
|
if i am interpreting this correctly, the amendment would require, in effect, the state supreme court to let stand this right no matter the intended interference by any municipal/county agency/government. example: let's say the city of whoville, alabama, passes a city law that would cause an infringement of the state's interpretation of the second amendment, perhaps not allowing semiautomatic rifle/shotgun/pistol ownership in city limits. this city law would not stand strictest scrutiny, and would be struck down by the court.
but, hey, i could be wrong ... my understanding they can't do that now . i vote no .
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129218
10/29/14 07:29 AM
10/29/14 07:29 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,956 Round ‘bout there
Clem
Mildly Quirky
|
Mildly Quirky
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,956
Round ‘bout there
|
Why are they jacking around with rights already established - firearms, hunting/fishing - and "reaffirming" these rights?
Hey, did you know you have the right to free speech?
Why, sure. It's covered in the First Amendment. I don't like some of the things about it, like pornographic speech, but I'd rather have freedom than censorship.
Great! We have an amendment that AGAIN says you have the right to free speech! It also has a few other things but it DOES REALLY SAY that you have the right to free speech in Alabama and no one else can take away that basic right.
So, I already have it. Just like the Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms. Or the "right to hunt and fish" approved by Alabama voters several years ago and spelled out again. But you're wanting me to vote on something that again reaffirms what I already have?
Yes! Because we need to keep the Godless Commies and "others' from harming your rights!
Um, don't I already have those rights spelled out in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Actually, those just affirm what we had to begin with. Why the new amendment?
You should approve of this! Why don't you want to support America and your rights?
/circularBSargumentsensue/
Last edited by Clem; 10/29/14 07:30 AM.
"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter
"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013
"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
|
|
|
|