Tuesday, February 20, 2007

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: FAA WITHDRAWS COLLECTIVE RIGHTS INTEPRETATION OF SECOND AMENDMENT

A WarOnGuns Exclusive

In reference to previous posts and observations presented by The War on Guns:



The new text is as follows:
[Federal Register: February 20, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 33)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 7740-7741]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr20fe07-3]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration.

14 CFR Parts 401, 415, 431, 435, 440, and 460

[Docket No. FAA-2005-23449]
RIN 2120-AI57


Human Space Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: When the FAA issued a final rule on human space flight, it described one rule as consistent with the Second Amendment of the Constitution because, among other things, the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment is a collective right. The FAA now withdraws that characterization and amends its description.

DATES: This correction is effective February 20, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information, contact Kenneth Wong, Deputy Manager, Licensing and Safety Division, Commercial Space Transportation, AST-200, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-8465; facsimile (202) 267-3686, e-mail ken.wong@faa.gov. For legal information, contact Laura Montgomery, Senior Attorney, Office of the Chief Counsel, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202) 267-3150; facsimile
(202) 267-7971, e-mail laura.montgomery@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: As required by the Commercial Space Launch Amendments Act of 2004, the FAA established Human Space Flight Requirements for Crew and Space Flight Participants, 71 FR 75616 (Dec. 15, 2006). The FAA's new requirements for commercial human space flight include a rule on security mandating that operators ``implement security requirements to prevent any space flight participant from jeopardizing the safety of the flight crew or the public'' and prohibiting a space flight participant from carrying on board ``any explosives, firearms, knives or other weapons.'' 14 CFR 460.53. In explaining this rule in response to a comment, the FAA characterized the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the Constitution as ``a collective right.'' 71 FR at 75626. The FAA now withdraws that characterization of the right to bear arms. The prohibition on the carriage of firearms by participants in commercial space flights remains unchanged.
The Executive Branch, through the Department of Justice, interprets the Second Amendment as securing a right of individuals to keep and bear arms. (See Memorandum for the Attorney General from Steven G. Bradbury, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, et al., Re: Whether The Second Amendment Secures An Individual Right (Aug. 24, 2004), available at http://www.usdoj.gov/olcsecondoamendment2.pdf ). In light of this interpretation, the FAA is withdrawing the statement made in the final rule.
Regardless of the nature of the right, however, it remains true, as we noted, that the right is, like any other, not unfettered. The Justice Department itself made this abundantly clear in its analysis and through its historical review. (See generally id. at 1-5, 6 n.19, 8 n.29, 18 n.68, 61-68, 73, 81-82, 87-98, 102-04.) Similarly, the Fifth Circuit, which treats the right to bear arms as an

[[Page 7741]]

individual right, has stated, ``Although, as we have held, the Second Amendment does protect individual rights, that does not mean that those rights may never be made subject to any limited, narrowly tailored specific exceptions or restrictions for particular cases that are reasonable and not inconsistent with the right of Americans generally to individually keep and bear their private arms as historically
understood in this country.'' U.S. v. Emerson, 270 F.3d 203 (5th Cir.
2001).
The FAA continues to believe that the possession of weapons by space flight participants on board a suborbital rocket poses an unacceptably high risk to the integrity of the vehicle and the safety of the public, and that the rule is consistent with the Second Amendment. In proposing the rule, we pointed out that ``[s]ecurity restrictions currently apply to passengers for airlines. Some of the restrictions prohibit a person carrying explosives, firearms, knives, or other weapons from boarding an airplane. Similar types of security restrictions for launch or reentry vehicles would contribute to the safety of the public by preventing a space flight participant from potentially interfering with the flight crew's ability to protect the public.'' 70 FR 77262-01, 77271. In response to the comment regarding
the Second Amendment, we added that ``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.'' 71 FR at 75626. The FAA thus has authority to issue this rule.

Correction

In final rule FR Doc. No FAA-2005-23449, published on December 15,2006 (71 FR 75616), make the following correction: On page 75626, in the third column, fourth full paragraph, lines 16 through 20, correct, ``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'' to read ``By analogy, and for the reasons given when the FAA issued its human space flight requirements, the FAA has, consistent with the right to bear arms secured by the Second Amendment.''
* * * * *

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 14, 2007.
Rebecca MacPherson,
Assistant Chief Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. E7-2851 Filed 2-16-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


Now the debate can focus on the "fettering" (read "infringing") aspect of the rule. You may ask "so what?" as if this changes nothing, but in fact, withdrawing the collective rights interpetation is significant, and here's the reality I want WoG readers to walk away understanding: If you know you're right, keep pushing--even if those with vastly more reach ignore you and others actively oppose you or put you down for it--all of which happened in this case. We can't let that deter us from doing what's right. We, and by that, know that it includes YOU, can effect change when the truths we present are undeniable.

Cabela's Reviewing Zumbo TV Sponsorship

Additionally, Cabela's has not yet dropped their sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show, Cabela's Frank Ross is being quoted as having said their legal department is "currently reviewing contractual obligations and commitments regarding our sponsorship of the Jim Zumbo Outdoors television show.
Jim Shepherd gives us a pretty comprehensive recap of the whole sorry Zumbo affair.

UPDATE: Blog O'Stuff has more.

Klueless in Kennesaw

After the law was passed, there have been few accidental shootings in Kennesaw and none involving children in the 20 years that Lt. Craig Graydon has been with the department.

Yet the law is not known by all residents and it is not strictly enforced. No one has ever been arrested for not owning a gun and there is no penalty for violating the city ordinance, Graydon said.

That's good news for Mary Kopins, who has lived in the city for seven years.

"I hadn't heard of it," she said. "I hope that doesn't mean I have to go out and get a gun."
How can you live there for seven years and not know about it? No, Mary, you don't have to do anything. Continue grazing contentedly. But just one question: You have heard of wolves, haven't you?

We're the Only Ones Switched Enough

Amends the Criminal Code of 1961. Provides that the unlawful use of weapons statute does not apply to the purchase, possession, or carrying of a switchblade knife by a peace officer.

Mr. Bernstein? Mr. Sondheim? Music, please:
When you're a Jet,
You're the swingin'est thing:
Little boy, you're a man;
Little man, you're a king!

...Here come the Jets
Like a bat out of hell.
Someone gets in our way,
Someone don't feel so well!
[Via 45superman]

[More from "The Only Ones" files...]

We're the Only Ones Lost in the Country Enough

An investigation continued this weekend into the shooting of a farmer by a Fresno County sheriff's deputy who apparently went to the wrong address to check on a 911 call...

The deputy told investigators a man wearing a ski mask and armed with a gun came out of the house and pointed a gun at him...the sheriff has not released the deputy's name.

Srabian's sister...said her brother was wearing a beanie, which he likes to pull down low to cover his ears to protect him from the cold. She said believes her brother, who had been in the dining room, heard a dog barking, noticed a car outside and armed himself when he went outside.
"The sheriff has not released the deputy's name." Oh well, we know who the Srabians are, that ought to be enough.

And let's be fair. 7297 E. Walter Ave. does sound awful similar to 7274--and even if they are on opposite sides of the road, they share 2 digits. Besides, who among us hasn't confused a beanie with a ski mask?

Let this be a lesson to you if you live in the country where help isn't instantly available--guns only make the problem worse. If you must investigate strange unexpected visitors, always do so unarmed. Unless you're a trained "Only One."

Classified by the Oblivious

In 2003, Akins Group Inc. developed the Akins Accelerator, a bumpfire stock for a Ruger 10/22 that can produce about 650 rounds/minute. The company received classification letters from the BATFE agreeing that the stock was not a firearm and therefore unregulated.

Akins performed approximately 18 months of testing, built injection molds based on the results, and began offering the Accelerator to the public in December of 2006.

True to form, the BATFE suddenly decided that the plastic stock was in fact a machine gun. The considerable time, effort, and of course money Akins invested into the project has been rendered essentially useless.
JPFO gives us the lowdown on the latest BATFU outrage. That approval letter ought to be grounds for a lawsuit to recover all costs incurred based on relying on it. And whoever signed it should be found personally liable.

[Via Wm H]

Return of the Unix_Jedi

De-Zumbo the NRA
and
A Damn Good Question

How can you not like a guy who agrees with me? The force is strong in this one!

A Stock Answer

Yeah, I know, it's mean to kick a man when he's down.

But this is pretty damn funny.

"Staples Stock Clerk."

Laughing here...

[Via Countertop]

Females with Firearms

It was a Valentine's gift from her husband: gun lessons at a firing range. It’s a new trend turning heads nationwide... And in Kentuckiana.

More good news from friend Barry Laws, and his great new facility, Open Range. And it's refreshing to see the place get good press.

Barry took a risk moving from California to pursue a dream. It looks like it's paying off, and I'm glad for him.

We're the Only Ones Who Can Defend Ourselves

An off-duty D.C. police officer shot a man who officials say was trying to rob him today.
Any guess what the police office would have done had he been on duty, and a non-"Only One" defended himself by shooting someone?

[Via Gun Law News]

This Day in History: February 20

On this day in 1792, President George Washington signs legislation renewing the United States Post Office as a cabinet department led by the postmaster general, guaranteeing inexpensive delivery of all newspapers, stipulating the right to privacy and granting Congress the ability to expand postal service to new areas of the nation.
Wonder what George would have thought of this...