Assaulting Jim Zumbo The NRA on Extremists NRA scams its members The Lionel Show AirAm Radio's ignorant, crude, ugly, air waves barbarian Dear John Ashcroft The armed populace doctrine at the DOJ The Washington Post cultivating ignorance. Gun Policy News news stories compiled daily. "Sixty Minutes" Failing its Mission NPR's Diane Rehm Civilized without Substance. A longstanding dereliction. Violence Policy Center The public health agenda falls in line with the NRA. AFL-CIO Getting it right but failing its mission in the larger struggle Militia Act of 1792 To enroll— conscript, register Return of Militia Inventory of private weapons in the early Republic reported to the President of the US History John Kenneth Rowland Lawrence Cress John K. Mahon Others Pseudohistory LaPierre's list The Quotes, the Quotes Fabricating the armed populace doctrine Libertarians, Conservatives Tenn. Law Rev., 1995 Chicago-Kent Symposium, 2000 What does the NRA want?

update June 5, 2009 The Ninth Circuit released its revised opinion in Nordyke (2003) on April 20, 2009. http://www.potowmack.org/nordyke.html We have a long standing crisis in domestic gun violence and a growing crisis in violence and sovereignty on the Southwest boarder. We now also have a crisis in the advance of anarchic doctrines on the federal judiciary. The revised Nordyke opinion is in conflict with NRA v. Chicago released June 2, 2009 and Maloney v. Cuomo (2009). July 16, 2008 The former homepage through March 5, 2008, has been moved to a new file. Addressing Gun Violence contains more information. The homepage from March 5, 2008, to July 16, 2008, the most important part of which is a letter to Walter Dellinger who argued for the DC gov to the Supreme Court, has been moved to "Whither the United States of America?". There are other important observations. II. Sovereignty and the appalling spectacle of anarchic federal judges The Potowmack Institute wrote in its amicus brief in Parker et al. v. DC Gov., filed in July, 2006: When federal judges in dissent to the Ninth Circuit denial of an en banc hearing of Silveira speak of an "amorphous body” of the armed people, no different from the NRA’s "armed populace at large" or LENIN’s “armed masses”, a burden falls on the federal judiciary to define and defend constitutional government against anarchy. http://www.potowmack.org/parkarg.pdf, p. 20 The Silveira dissents are at: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/019661EF3BAAF4C488256D1D00793D3A/$file/0115098o.pdf?openelement Here is how far we have fallen: It was Judge Kleinfeld's dissent that spoke of an amorphous body of the armed populace. In his Parker opinion, Judge Silberman cites Kleinfeld's dissent twelve times. By affirming Judge Silberman's opinion the Supreme Court has embraced indirectly at least Kleinfeld's dissent. This is what we have come to. Instead of defining and defending constitutional government against anarchy, the DC Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, in throwing a meaningless political sop to the gun vote and the gun rights ideologies, has embraced anarchy and otherwise created a constitutional mess. This is all about politics and demagoguery not constitutional doctrine. On rereading, the dissent is much worse than it originally appeared. This is all really quite confused and nonsensical. The gun rights ideologies did not get what they want: The right to be armed outside of the knowledge and reach of law and government. The "amorphous body"—that is, the NRA's "armed populace at large"— is still subject to "reasonable regulations and restrictions" and registered like the jury pool for call-up. Is there any political leadership to make sense out of the absurdity?

[PotowmackForum] interactive posting