Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001
From: "B. A. L'Aloge" 

..........
Senator Hatch, once upon a time you were a fairly decent senator--at 
least until the advent of the Clinton administration. America has 
watched you become over the past eight years just another of Clinton's 
tame lapdogs. You certainly learned how to roll over and play dead well 
enough. Who says old dogs can't learn new tricks? Where is the man who 
stated in 1982 in preface in his capacity of Chairman, U.S. Senate 
Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on the Constitution:

"James Madison would be startled to hear that his recognition of a right 
to keep and bear arms, which passed the House by a voice vote without 
objection and hardly a debate, has since been construed in but a single, 
and most ambiguous Supreme Court decision, whereas his proposals for 
freedom of religion, which he made reluctantly out of fear that they 
would be rejected or narrowed beyond use, and those for freedom of 
assembly, which passed only after a lengthy and biller debate, are the 
subject of scores of detailed and favorable decisions. Thomas Jefferson, 
who kept a veritable armory of pistols, rifles and shotguns at 
Monticello, and advised his nephew to forsake other sports in favor of 
hunting, would be astounded to hear supposed civil libertarians claim 
firearm ownership should be restricted. Samuel Adams, a handgun owner 
who pressed for an amendment stating that the Constitution shall never 
be construed... to prevent the people of the United States who are 
peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms," would be shocked to 
hear that his native state today imposes a year's sentence, without 
probation or parole, for carrying a firearm without a police permit."

This is not to imply that courts have totally ignored the impact of the 
Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights. No fewer than twenty-one 
decisions by the courts of our states have recognized an individual 
right to keep and bear arms, and a majority of these have not only 
recognized the right but invalidated laws or regulations which abridged 
it. Yet in all too many instances, courts or commentators have sought, 
for reasons only tangentially related to constitutional history, to 
construe this right out of existence. They argue that the Second 
Amendment's words "right of the people" mean "a right of the state" 
apparently overlooking the impact of those same words when used in the 
First and Fourth Amendments. The "right of the people" to assemble or to 
be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is not contested as an 
individual guarantee. Still they ignore consistency and claim that the 
right to "bear arms" relates only to military uses. This not only 
violates a consistent constitutional reading of "right of the people" 
but also ignores that the second amendment protects a right to "keep" 
arms. These commentators contend instead that the amendment's preamble 
regarding the necessity of a "well regulated militia... to a free 
state" means that the right to keep and bear arms applies only to a 
National Guard. Such a reading fails to note that the Framers used the 
term "militia" to relate to every citizen capable of bearing arms, and 
that the Congress has established the present National Guard under its 
own power to raise armies, expressly stating that it was not doing so 
under its power to organize and arm the militia.

When the first Congress convened for the purpose of drafting a Bill of 
Rights, it delegated the task to James Madison. Madison did not write 
upon a blank tablet. Instead, he obtained a pamphlet listing the State 
proposals for a bill of rights and sought to produce a briefer version 
incorporating all the vital proposals of these. His purpose was to 
incorporate, not distinguish by technical changes, proposals such as 
that of the Pennsylvania minority, Sam Adams, or the New Hampshire 
delegates. Madison proposed among other rights that "That right of the 
people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and 
well regulated militia being the best security of a free country; but no 
person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to 
render military service in person." In the House, this was initially 
modified so that the militia clause came before the proposal 
recognizing the right. The proposals for the Bill of Rights were then 
trimmed in the interests of brevity. The conscientious objector clause 
was removed following objections by Elbridge Gerry, who complained that 
future Congresses might abuse the exemption to excuse everyone from 
military service.

The proposal finally passed the House in its present form: "A well 
regulated militia, being necessary for the preservation of a free state, 
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." 
In this form it was submitted into the Senate, which passed it the 
following day. The Senate in the process indicated its intent that the 
right be an individual one, for private purposes, by rejecting an 
amendment which would have limited the keeping and bearing of arms to 
bearing "For the common defense".

Your own words confirm you know the Founders' intent and meaning of 
"infringe". Those same words expose you as a conscious betrayer of your 
oath to protect and defend the Constitution. You, of all people, cannot 
claim ignorance as an excuse for your actions. It is indeed peculiar you 
have intentionally forced your juvenile justice bill (S. 254) to the 
floor of the Senate with the express intention of adopting a number of 
Clinton gun control proposals in order to "politically diffuse the 
issue."

Following are some of the gun control proposals you put forth according 
to Gun Owners of America:

* A lifetime gun ban for juveniles committing minor gun-related 
indiscretions at a very young age [Section 441-- Hatch/Craig amendment 
on page S5310 of the Congressional Record, 5/13/99];

* A precedent-setting requirement that PRIVATE individuals (non-FFLs) 
at gun shows be subject to mandatory checks and federal regulation 
[listed in the unnumbered final section in the Hatch/Craig amendment on 
page S5313 of the Congressional Record, 5/13/99];

* Extending the arcane and confusing juvenile handgun ban to 
semi-autos, which are used in less than 2% of serious crimes [Section 
451 of the Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5310-S5311 of the 
Congressional Record, 5/13/99];

* Designating and funding U.S. Attorney personnel to harass gun owners 
[Sections 403-405 of the Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5309 of the 
Congressional Record, 5/13/99];

* Increasing penalties for violating the almost incomprehensible 
regulations governing the circumstances under which you may legally take 
your kid hunting or target shooting with a handgun or semi-auto [Section 
451 of the Hatch/Craig amendment on page S5310-11 of the Congressional 
Record, 5/13/99].

What caused your defection, Senator Hatch? Was Clinton blackmailing you 
with information in your FBI file? Could it have been because you were 
investigated in 1993 for helping a business associate get a loan from 
the infamous Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) which 
swindled Americans and others of more than $8 billion. You defended the 
bank until the last possible moment. Did Clinton's good pal and personal 
financier, Jackson Stevens, perhaps tell him which particular BBCI 
closet to look for your skeletons?
..........

Sincerely,

B. A. L'Aloge

SUBSCRIBE???
Send an email to: S.A.V.E._America-subscribe@topica.com