Second amendment court case you’ve never head of
Seen in comments here (and written by this guy), I present without comment:
SYNOPSIS:
I am a U.S. merchant seaman with a Second Amendment cause of action that has been languishing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia since 2002. Because I am an unrepresented civil plaintiff with a Second Amendment case I have been jerked around the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Appellate Procedure, and the U.S. Supreme Court these past 4 years until I discovered the biggest act of corruption to date. Because I am a resident of Arkansas, using my Arkansas address on every complaint and pleading these past 4 years, no judge or court clerk ever though to look at the law on jurisdiction (28 U.S.C. 1402(a)(1)) to tell me that the U.S. District Court for DC DOES NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER ME! That means that my case for these last 4 years is VOID FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION. I am now fighting to get my case in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock), Northern Division (Batesville).
REBUTTAL:
Instead of the federal licensing scheme how about using the Federal Premption Doctrine from the U.S. Constitution’s supremacy clause preempting local and State gun control laws that restrict, prohibit, or otherwise infringe upon the Second Amendment right (along with the Ninth, Tenth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendments) to openly keep and bear arms in intrastate and interestate as a form and function of the Common Defence clause (“Defence” is the original spelling as used) in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution?
The power of the States and of the Federal Government to legislate and regulate the Second Amendment has almost always been done in a prohibitive manner through the Commerce Clause since Roosevelt’s threatened Court Packing Plan of the 1930’s. Nothing is every said or written about legislating and regulating the Second Amendment in a positive manner through the Common Defence clause of the Preamble.
If the FCC can employ the Federal Premption Doctrine for the Amateur Radio Service with PRB-1 (http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/local/prb-1_program.html) as a matter of protecting the First Amendment for amateur radio operators then the BATF/E can employ the Federal Premption Doctrine to protect Second Amendment rights of American gun owners restoring the right to openly keep and bear arms in intrastate and interstate travel by preempting local/State (and federal?) gun control laws that prohibit or otherwise interfere with that right.
Such a case is in the process of moving from the corrupt U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Case Nos. 02-1434, 02-1434, and 03-2160) to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas (Little Rock), Northern Division (Batesville). As you may know the original 1939 U.S. Supreme Court case, United States v. Miller began in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas (Fort Smith).
The present case that is on the move to Little Rock/Batesville, Arkansas is HAMRICK v. PRESIDENT BUSH, et al. It is a Second Amendment case for National Open Carry Handgun from a U.S. merchant seaman’s point of view taking the Second Amendment through the Common Defence clause of the Preamble and through the Ninth, Tenth, Thirteenth, and Fourteenth Amendment. The case employs the RICO Act to allege the United States is racketeering an unlawful and an unconstitutional protection scheme over the Second Amendment in addition to the central cause of action of government wrongdoing, retaliation, and harassment of me for being a protaganist for Second Amendment rights of American civilian seafarers when the U.S. Government requires small arms training as a prerequisite for seafarers seeking employment aboard U.S. Government vessels when the U.S. Coast Guard refuses to provide occupational documentations of such compulsory training in the form of an endorsement on the “Merchant Mariner’s Document” (ID card). I want the endorsement to right “National Open Carry Handgun” as a matter of right not as a matter of licensing.
If “National Open Carry Handgun” was the social and legal norm for the first 100 years of our nation’s history then it ought to be part of today’s social and legal norms for the simple reason that it is THE “constitutional norm.”
All gun control laws are nothing more than GOVERNMENT placating to the phobic of society on the false premise that government can protect society from the criminal element. This is tantamount to government supporting a delusion for the sake of government.
August 25th, 2006 at 6:47 am
One minor quibble: read PRB-1. The only time the First Amendment is mentioned is that it is the opinion of some amateur operators that antenna and operating restrictions infringe on their First Amendment rights. PRB-1 does not have anything to do with protection from First Amendment infringements. It is simply to protect ham operators from overly restrictive antenna restrictions. It would make more sense to argue that the amateur license itself is an infringement on free speech.
Since its inception, the FRC–later to become the FCC–has had rules in place restricting what can and cannot be said over the air–and who can and cannot transmit via radio. Since amateur operators are self-policing, no one gets away with doing anything against the rules for very long. The only way to work outside the rules is to go pirate.
His PRB-1 analogy is not valid.
August 25th, 2006 at 9:28 am
The only thing Congress needs to enforce the 2nd amendment on the states is the 14th amendment.
August 25th, 2006 at 1:23 pm
Hmmmm. PRB-1 argument as an act of federal preemption? I’ll have to look into that and reconstruct the argument or find other examples. Thank you for the critique.
August 25th, 2006 at 2:13 pm
“Second amendment court case you’ve never head of.”
My Second Amendment case is advocating “National Open Carry Handgun” in intrastate and interstate travel as a matter of right and not as a matter of privilege (license). The NRA’s agenda is National Reciprocity for Concealed Carry” which is a licensing scheme that transforms a national right into a state privilege. The NRA is advocating a fraud by pushing such an agenda.
In 2002 the NRA declined my request for legal assitance and representation. I have the the their letter from NRA attorney Robert Dowlut as a PDF document as evidence that the NRA is not interested in restoration the Second Amendment to its proper role in American jurisprudence.
And because I have been a protaganist for the Holy Grail of Second Amendment rights, “National Open Carry Handgun,” I provoked the ire of the U.S. Coast Guard in 2002 to which I was subjected to a criminal investigation by the U.S. Naval Criminal Investigative Service when I was kicked off a U.S. Government vessel of the pre-position fleet anchored off the coast of Lithuania. That incident became a cause of action for damages in the federal courts – but lost at every turn because I was not represented by an attorney. In 2004 evidence suggests that the U.S. Coast Guard requested the U.S. Department of Transportation to issue a “Bar Notice” against me from visiting or entering any DOT, FAA, or U.S. Coast Guard HQ buildings in Washington, DC. I was not informed of this Bar Notice until my visit on August 10, 2006 when I attempted to visit the U.S. Coast Guard as an unrepresented civil plaintiff. My luggage was searched. One pair of scissors was confiscated on the premise that it was a “weapon” even though they missed my second pair of scissors in my laptop bag. And why search my luggage if I was prohibited from entering the building in the first place? Couldn’t the act of searching my luggage be construed as a contractual agreement to enter the building as security signs often say “enter this building is a consent to search?” And to compound the situation I was not given a receipt for the confiscated scissors. Doesn’t that violate the Fifth Amendment takings clause without compensation?
Now, if I visit the Coast Guard, the FAA, or the DOT without contacting security at DOT first I will be arrested even though I would be visiting as an unrepresented civil plaintiff in a RICO Act case against the Coast Guard, or even if I was visiting as a merchant seaman on maritime business. This places me in a Catch-22 situation. Needless to say I filed a Motion for a Permanent Injunction to squash this Bar Notice which is still pending.
Over these past 4 years I have contacted nearly every Second Amendment advocacy group, NRA, SAF, KABA, for help and for publicity and because my case advocates the politically incorrect aspect of the Second Amendment no one is interested in writing Op-Eds or commentaries or even an actual news story asbout me Second Amendment case employing the RICO Act against the U.S. Government.
I have on occassion been characterized as the “Don Quixote of the Second Amendment.” I have to laugh about that description because there is some measure of truth to it. Like it or not, I have pushed this case for 4 years, pleading to everyone, be it the judicial, legislative and executive branches of the U.S. Government, Second Amendment advocacy groups, philanthropic millionaires or billionaires for a trinkle of funding (nada), even anti-gun groups to provoke publicity from that end in hope of triggering a reaction from the NRA (nada on both goals).
Even against this national apathy for the Holy Grail of Second Amendment rights on the presumed belief that it will never happen I press on with my efforts in filing my 2,000+ page Civil RICO Act Complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Northern Division.
SOME DON QUIXOTE QUOTES:
—————
“One man scorned and covered with scars still strove with his last ounce of courage to reach the unreachable stars; and the world was better for this.”
————
“Beware, gentle knight – the greatest monster of them all is reason.”
————-
“I marched into hell for a heavenly cause.
And I know, if I’ll always be true to this glorious quest,
That my heart will lie peaceful and calm when I’m laid to my rest.
And the world will be better for this…”
……………………from “The Imposible Dream” in “Man of Lamanche”
—————–
“Facts are the enemy of truth.”
——————