Amend Constitution by Statute, Using EPA Laws

[allingeneral]

email from alan at gunlaws.com
Amend Constitution by Statute, Using EPA Laws

"The National Parks Service has announced it will not challenge a court
order that temporarily stops the late-term Bush administration policy of
allowing CCW-permit holders to carry in National Parks."

That's the news media's backwards way of saying the bureaucrats running
the National Parks are delighted they don't have to allow CCW-permit
holders to exercise their civil rights in the parks, at least for now.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a temporary injunction,
favoring a lawsuit brought by gun-control and environmental activists. She
gave the Interior Dept., which runs the parks, until April 20 to respond.

The idea that parks must first undergo environmental-impact approval
before partially honoring the right to keep and bear arms is a complete
subterfuge and extremely dangerous on several grounds.

Most obvious, there is NO environmental impact of carrying an unfired gun
in a park or elsewhere. Even fired, at the rate CCW permitees fire their
guns, the impact is so small it is essentially unmeasurable. The District
Court/EPA/Brady effort is a transparent deception, used by hoplophobes and
gun banners, to stop a ruling that would restore limited civil rights (for
government permitees only) and could save lives and deter crime.

The original 25-year-old ban was created during the Reagan era, reversing
the right to carry that existed on these public lands since the nation's
founding.

A bigger problem however is that, if EPA can be used to stop mere
concealed carry on the basis of enviro-impact, what does that say for any
form of outdoor marksmanship? The impact difference between carry and use
is obvious. If the precedent of allowing EPA to regulate CCW stands, this
invites the wholesale destruction of any outdoor target practice on public
land. Officials know this. Nationwide, public land is a mainstay of
open-air exercise of the right to bear arms -- for practicing for
proficiency and safety.

Using environmental threats to deny the civil and human right of self
defense and the constitutional right to keep and bear arms is environmental
terrorism.

The biggest problem though is that this repugnant scheme uses a statute
and its regulations -- the EPA machinery -- to suppress the Constitution
itself, namely the Second Amendment.

An ongoing and increasing problem, EPA and numerous other federal
agencies, FHA, FCC, FTC, FDA, TSA, EEOC and others have suppressed First
Amendment free-speech guarantees for decades. Now, using EPA legislation,
people in charge are making inroads into infringing RKBA out of existence.
Such activity is patently illegal. The terms of the Constitution can only
be changed by amendment, as described in the Constitution itself, and not
by law making from Washington or anywhere else.

People suggesting or implementing such actions should be quickly removed
from office for violation of their oath, and brought up on charges of
denial of civil rights and abuse of power. That had better happen soon,
because we are reaching a tipping point. How many abuses and usurpations
need we endure before people take to their pitchforks?

[SnakeEater]

Thats rich the EPA doing environmental studies on unfired firearms and the impact on the environment. And the stupid courts going along with it.

Just one more tool for the USSA (United Socialist States of America) to use to shut down the Constitution one amendment at a time.

Will