William Barr on Second Amendment During Confirmation Hearings~Video

[Elderberry]

Ammoland by by Dean Weingarten 1/17/2019

U.S.A. -(Ammoland.com)- On January 15, just a little before 5 p.m. Senator John Cornyn asked Attorney General nominee William P. Barr about his views on the Second Amendment. The question and answer were recorded as part of C-SPAN coverage of the nomination process.

The question and answer, with some more commentary by Senator Cornyn occur from about 4:56:33 to 5:00:04 on the C-SPAN timer.  There is a transcript on the C-SPAN link, but it has a few errors, perhaps introduced by the automated computer transcription process.

For example, the transcript misses the first half of Senator Cornyn's opening sentence, where he says “Mr. Barr, I want to talk about guns,” I have created a more accurate transcript below. It can be checked by watching the video.

Starting about 4:56:33 on January 15, 2019 from c-span.org:

    Senator John Cornyn from Texas:

    “Mr Barr, I want to talk about guns, and I want to talk about China in the five minutes we have together. Back in 1992 there was some discussion about your position on Congress' role when it comes to banning certain types of semi-automatic weapons, sometimes people call those “assault weapons”. But In the intervening years, the Supreme Court has now spoken, both in the Heller and McDonald cases, and recognized the Second Amendment confers an individual and fundamental right to bear arms.

    Could you, sir,  bring us up to date from your views in 1992, and how they were affected by Heller and McDonald, and what your views are now on the Second Amendment?”

    The Hon. William P. Barr:

    “Sure. I think I opposed an assault weapon ban because I felt that was really sort of the aesthetics of the gun. 

    Since that time Heller has been decided. Actually, before Heller, I did work on OLC on this issue, and I personally concluded that the Second Amendment creates a personal right, under the Constitution.

    It's based on the Lockean notion of the right of self-preservation. It's tied to that. I was glad to see Heller come out and vindicate that initial view that I had.

     And so there is no question under Heller that the right to have weapons, firearms, is protected under the Second Amendment and is a personal right. At the same time there is room for reasonable regulation.

    From my standpoint, what I would look for, in assessing a regulation, is what is the burden on law-abiding people and is it proportionate to whatever benefit, in terms of safety and effectiveness, will be conferred.

     As I said, just a moment ago, lets get down to the real problem we are confronting, which is keeping these weapons out of the hands of people who are mentally ill. I think all the rest of this stuff is really, essentially rhetoric, until we get that problem dealt with; in terms of regulatory approaches.”

This transcript ends about 4:59:35 on January 15, 2019. Senator Cornyn has some additional commentary after that.

A short analysis of Mr. Barr's Second Amendment testimony:

More: https://www.ammoland.com/2019/01/ag-nominee-william-barr-on-second-amendment-during-confirmation-hearings/#axzz5d47hwHHg

[Cyber Liberty]

One of the most destructive governmental policies we have is Civil Forfeiture, where people lose property without due process.  Sessions loved the idea to death, I want to know what Mr. Barr thinks about it.

[libertybele]

I don't like his comments of him "assessing" regulations and where he feels that the needs is to keep guns out of the mentally ill.

Who determines what mentally ill is?  Is it someone who just lost a loved one and needs something to help them through?  Is it someone who has pain that is alleviated by an anti-depressant?  Is it those that go through marriage counseling?  Will doctors have to report every patient that uses a drug that the gov't determines is for the mentally ill?? 

Assessing regulations.  It took a team of lawyers and the Supreme Court to make the Heller decision.  He know better than them?

No, I am not comfortable at all with Barr. 

Another nomination by Trump that puzzles me.

[EdJames]

I don't like his comments of him "assessing" regulations and where he feels that the needs is to keep guns out of the mentally ill.

Who determines what mentally ill is?  Is it someone who just lost a loved one and needs something to help them through?  Is it someone who has pain that is alleviated by an anti-depressant?  Is it those that go through marriage counseling?  Will doctors have to report every patient that uses a drug that the gov't determines is for the mentally ill?? 

Assessing regulations.  It took a team of lawyers and the Supreme Court to make the Heller decision.  He know better than them?

No, I am not comfortable at all with Barr. 

Another nomination by Trump that puzzles me.

I believe it is because he has, like all Presidents, a limited list of "suitable" people that he can try to get confirmed.  Obviously Barr was on the list.

[jafo2010]

My big fear is that it is worse than that.  I think Trump may have sold out to the swamp.  His last three major appointments have all been people affiliated with past Bush Administrations.  And in every case, he whined afterwards that he wished he did not have to have them in place.

The FED chair is not only a Bushie, but was also involved in the Carlyle Group.  He should never have been selected!

Trump keeps selecting Bushies, he might as well hang up his spurs for 2020, for they will undermine him every step of the way.

[Hoodat]

I think Trump may have sold out to the swamp.

Ya think?

[edpc]

One of the most destructive governmental policies we have is Civil Forfeiture, where people lose property without due process.  Sessions loved the idea to death, I want to know what Mr. Barr thinks about it.

Meadows has floated it as a way to fund the wall. In a way, so has Cruz, with his El Chapo seizure suggestion.


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/this-might-be-the-worst-idea-yet-to-fund-trumps-wall

[Cyber Liberty]

Meadows has floated it as a way to fund the wall. In a way, so has Cruz, with his El Chapo seizure suggestion.


https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/this-might-be-the-worst-idea-yet-to-fund-trumps-wall

I've read that article, too.  A pox on all of them.