Political organizations claiming to fight for your rights are a dime a dozen. If D.C. is a swamp, then they are the mosquitoes looking to suck away your donations while maintaining a status quo; they wage a defensive war against the feds without erecting any permanent legal protections, all while scaring you into writing another check.
Such a setup is also known as a racket.
ShallNot.org is here to break up that racket.
The Second Amendment isn’t hard to comprehend. It says the “right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. For us, this means no exceptions, no excuses, and no compromises. Any legislation that comes out of Washington restricting our gun rights, we oppose.
So how do we do this?
Well, it’s not by “bringing change” to D.C. That strategy has been tried and failed too many times. If it was a workable plan, then those organizations would have succeeded already.
Our intention is to thwart the feds at a state level by getting state legislatures to pass their own 2nd Amendment Preservation Act. The legislation employs a legal tactic known as anti-commandeering, which makes it illegal for state and local law enforcement officials to assist the feds in enforcing federal gun laws.
This strategy is both practical and effective. It is much easier to influence state legislators than senators in Washington, who are practically impervious to any criticism by their constituents. It also provides us with fifty opportunities for success, rather than only one.
Anti-commandeering also has a proven track record, having been used to block federal laws pertaining to marijuana in states where the feds have allowed de facto nullification of federal drug laws. Anti-commandeering was also used by abolitionists in response to the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, which allowed for federal marshals to violate the right of due process for black people and take them back to slave states.
At the end of the day, the feds require the assistance of the states to carry out their will. The 2nd Amendment Preservation Act deprives them of desperately-needed manpower and resources, and in the end any law passed in D.C. will have no meaning in states where local police agencies have their hands tied.
Most importantly, though, anti-commandeering is virtually immune against any legal challenges. For 150 years, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed its constitutionality, including Prigg v. Pennsylvania, in which the court concluded that the states could not be compelled to enforce federal laws concerning runaway slaves. Other notable cases upholding anti-commandeering include Printz v. US and Independent Business v. Sebelius.
At the moment, efforts by gun control advocates in D.C. to further restrict your right to keep and bear arms have been successfully stymied. But that will not always remain the case. Political environments change along with the weather.
We cannot put all our eggs into one basket by concentrating our entire focus on what happens thousands of miles away from our own states.
At the same time, those organizations that do lobby to defend your gun rights need all the reinforcements they can get. In a political war, there are many fronts, and D.C. is merely one of them.
One day, there may be a gun control majority in Congress eager to rubber stamp anything that comes out of the White House. With the rising use of presidential executive orders to subvert congressional authority, we can’t rely on the feds to enforce constitutional restraint. We must be prepared for that day before it comes, not afterwards.
Passing anti-commandeering legislation gives us certainty of victory in political battles that have yet to be fought, protecting our gun rights regardless of who sits in the Oval Office or who gets elected to Congress.
But in order to get these bills introduced, passed, and signed in as much states as possible, we need help from those who eager to do their part to protect the right upon which all other rights ultimately rely.
Will you join our ranks and take action today?