Republican Congressmen Form the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus

Second Amendment Letter Writing
Republican Congressmen Form the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus
U.S. Representative Thomas Massie
U.S. Representative Thomas Massie

WASHINGTON, D.C. – -( Today, a group of U.S. Representatives, led by Congressman Thomas Massie, launched the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus.

“The recent election results present us with a new opportunity to advance pro-gun legislation and reverse the erosion of the Second Amendment that's occurred over the last few decades. I look forward to working with the new President and this determined group of conservatives to promote a pro-gun agenda,” Massie stated.

“Preserving the right to keep and bear arms is essential to maintaining freedom and liberty in our country,” said former Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA), who chaired the caucus from 2009 through 2013. “I'm honored that Representative Massie will build on the foundation that I established with this caucus.”

“With so many laws disarming the poorest and most vulnerable people in our society and others who face real threats to their and their family’s safety, it is reassuring to know that the Second Amendment Caucus is there to ensure people’s safety,” said John Lott, economist and author of The War on Guns: Arming Yourself Against Gun Control Lies.

“While many of us lawyers are working to secure pro-gun reforms in the courts, it’s reassuring to know that the Second Amendment Caucus is doing the same in the legislature,” said attorney Alan Gura, who successfully argued McDonald v. City of Chicago and District of Columbia v. Heller before the U.S. Supreme Court.

The following congressmen are founding members of the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus:

  • Jeff Duncan (R-SC),
  • Ted Yoho (R-FL),
  • Brian Babin (R-TX),
  • Paul Gosar (R-AZ),
  • Mark Meadows (R-NC),
  • Ken Buck (R-CO),
  • Alex Mooney (R-WV),
  • Justin Amash (R-MI),
  • Jody Hice (R-GA),
  • Dave Brat (R-VA),
  • Warren Davidson (R-OH),
  • Scott Perry (R-PA),
  • and James Comer (R-KY).

Caucus members will lead efforts in the House of Representatives to pass meaningful firearms legislation and protect Americans against infringements of the Second Amendment.

In addition to drafting and sponsoring pro-gun legislation, members of the Second Amendment Caucus will invite firearm experts, constitutional scholars, and pro-gun groups to speak to the caucus.

Eligibility for membership in the Second Amendment Caucus will depend on a U.S. Representative’s voting record and his or her commitment to the caucus’s founding principles.

The Second Amendment Caucus, which operated from 2004 through 2008, was originally formed by former Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave of Colorado. In 2009 the caucus was reformed and renamed the Second Amendment Task Force by former Congressman Paul Broun of Georgia.

  • 25 thoughts on “Republican Congressmen Form the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus

    1. Dear Sirs,

      Would you please reach out to Andy Harris,
      Andrew P. “Andy” Harris is the U.S. Representative for Maryland’s 1st congressional district since 2011.
      We have some draconian laws on the books as well here in Maryland that infringe on our Second Ammendment rights.

      Joseph M. Sumego

    2. I’m sure that everyone here is aware that there are currently 12 States (soon to be 13 or 14) that do not require any kind of permission slip from their state to carry open or concealed. Those of you who are all pumped up about a Federal/National Reciprocity law are forgetting that such a law would essentially exclude the above states from participation, and force the citizens of those states to get an un-needed license just to exercise their right to carry when traveling in other states. And it would open the door for future administrations (Democratic/anti gun) to massage the law in ways none of us would like. This is a arsenic laden sugar cookie. Don’t buy into it.

      1. We in VT have been concerned about this. My understanding is that the recip bill will include language “that a person allowed to carry in their own state will be allowed to carry in all others”. Therefore, I can carry on here, but don’t have to leave my personal protection at home when I cross into Mass or NY. That would work well for me.

        1. Therein lies the problem with some National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Legislation. The problem is that the S 98 & HR 923 state “The legislation would also respect the rights of individuals who possess concealed carry permits from their home state, or who are not prohibited from carrying concealed in their home state, to exercise those rights in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry.”

          Basically, if one can carry in their home state, then they can carry in other states. However, the text “who are not prohibited from carrying concealed in their home state” is subject to interpretation.

          For example, if one resides in Los Angels County, CA, then one can go through the process of obtaining a CCW permit. However, one would never be issued because the Sheriff’s department just doesn’t issue them. So technically one is “not prohibited” by statue, but in reality they’re prohibited by policy.

          On the other hand, HR 986 & H 402 state “this bill would allow any person with a valid carry permit or license issued by a state to carry a concealed firearm in any other state that does not prohibit concealed carry.” This verbiage is much more clear and allows just about anyone to carry.

          National Concealed Carry Reciprocity is a good thing. However, “constitutional carry”—the right to carry firearms without a permit is better and ultimately the best outcome.

          I believe that many in California, New York el al would take either HR 986 & H 402, but prefer the Constitutional Carry.

    3. Constitutional (conceal carry) is a violation of our 2A,If we need a license and pay a fee for god giving right to keep and bear arms.Then i guess it would be alright to license and pay a fee for our 1st A.Constitutional is our right,conceal carry is a violation.

    4. Thank you, thank you, thank you! Please don’t forget about us behind enemy lines here in Massachusetts as well. There is quite a bit of true American support out in the suburbs… away from the cities. Do whatever you can to reverse the unconstitutional actions of our tyrannical AG Maura Healey and her lackey judges. Remind our RINO Governor Charlie Baker which party he actually belongs to and that our Rights are not political bartering chips!

    5. Gun Control is a direct attack against our constitution and should be considered an act of treason for anyone to suggest or support any infringement on the second amendment. There is nothing in the constitution that grants the government any power to control or regulate the type of arms people can own or posses. The Bill of Rights is the lone in the sand which the government is not allowed to cross. Liberal judges on the supreme court and dictator style politicians are pushing their agenda to destroy the foundation of this once great nation. Laws should be put in place to prevent these attacks on our liberty.

    6. Yes. where are the CA representatives? Where are our few Republicans?
      The Sacramento school board just voted themselves an immigration sanctuary zone. No immigration agents allowed on school property. Lets vote for sanctuary 2A counties (on the east side). If they can thumb their nose at the laws we should be able too also

      1. Fortunately District 50 where I reside we have Representative Duncan Hunter (CA-R).
        He’s a huge supporter for the second amendment in CA.
        I received a response from Rep Hunter today and he confirmed he’s a cosponsor of H.R. 923, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2015, which, like H.R. 402, requires states to recognize each others’ carry permits while additionally preserving states’ freedom to develop or maintain a “Constitutional carry” policy.

    7. Well, a 2nd Amendment Caucus to promote pro-gun legislation, really? Have any of these politicians read the Constitution? If they were familiar with the document then they’d know that FedGov has no Constitutional authority to pass, rules, regulations or law regarding firearms, whether Pro Gun or Anti-Gun. What they should be talking about is abolishing the Gun Control Act of 1934 and 1968 for starters. Remember, the 2nd Amendment did not grant a right, it merely codified it and reminded the new FedGov you can’t touch that.

      1. Tim, are you serious? In a perfect world your comment would be spot on but…we do not live in a perfect world. I assume you you’re somewhat aware of the thousands of anti-2nd Amendment laws and proposed legislatons in this country. Just sayin’ that I fully embrace the idea of this 2nd Amendment caucus to protect and restore the 2nd Amendment and reject the anti-2nd Amendment movement and their anti-2nd Amendment legislations.

      2. This may be a picky response to Tim’s comments but the 2nd Amendment does not forbid Congress from making laws concerning the Right to Bear Arms. It only forbids laws which infringe on those rights.

      1. Agreed! I’ve already contact my local representative Duncan Hunter (R-CA) about it.
        He’s currently a cosponsor on one of the national reciprocity bills.

    8. Obama’s Administration IS an Anti-Gun Administration and Hillary Clinton’s Administration would have been More of the Same, only it Would have been Worse if she had been Elected…Remember, she wanted to Abolish the 2nd Amendment the Minute she would have taken Office…She Just Like Obama, Do Not CARE about the Safety of American Citizens, but she WILL Coddle the Jihadist’s and their Potential Democratic Voters( Illegal Immigrants)…The True Patriots have Spoken and Elected Another True Patriot in Donald J. Trump.!!!

    9. California.

      Please don’t forget about California, we are getting shredded on all fronts violating our 2A. And typically what happens in CA pretty much spread like cancer across the the County step by step. Enviorment etc CARB, EPA bullet led ban most recent.

      1. Richard, thank you for speaking up on behalf of ca.
        I thought I was the only one talking about ca draconian gun laws.

        States should not have the power to deny constitutional rights.
        A good start would be to enforce a national right to carry in 50 states regardless what state your ccw permit is from.
        Non-resident resident have to go through the same background check.
        All the current national carry bills I see floating around are only for shall issue states. They would not apply to California.

        1. I agree. The way I read the text of the bills is that “All the current national carry bills I see floating around are only for shall issue states. They would not apply to California.”

          True National right to carry should be for all “regardless what state your ccw permit is from.”

            1. After reviewing the latest draft of representative Richard hudson’s 2017 reciprocity act bill, it clearly doesn’t help millions of people living in May-issue counties.
              It will only help counties that are shall issue.
              It is a pathetic response from all all the so called 2nd amendment support groups and organizations in this country.

    10. Is there any movement on the fbi nicks appeals process being speeded up? Thousands of Americans including myself are being denied are constitutional rights. I can not help but think this is a purposeful act perpetrated by this administration and it’s a anti gun agenda.

      1. Hey Robert,
        There are a few developments since the last time I updated the SAPPA page on
        Nick and I have been holding off posting until we could be confident that things are moving along as we suspect.

        Many do not know of the appeal we put into the 3rd Circuit. You Bob are aware but for some who may read this, here is a quick update on that.
        1. The District Court ordered that the Brief Nick filed almost 2 years ago must be redone and resubmitted or the Judge (Shipp) would throw our case out, with prejudice. (Shipp feared making a ruling on the law, so he thought this move up to avoid making a ruling that would someday bite him in the butt.
        2. We appealed that ruling to the Circuit Court.
        3. The Circuit Court denied the appeal stating they had no jurisdiction to intervene in a ruling of the lower court while the case was still active.
        4. We sent the Circuit Court a letter with examples of precedent explaining why they do have jurisdiction.
        5. The Circuit Court then agreed and asked Nick to provide a Brief explaining all that would be behind the Appeal.
        6. Nick and I worked on that Brief non-stop and we had it filed in less than 14 days.
        7. We were notified that the Obama appointed, Judge Shipp who had been delaying this lawsuit for over a year, had been removed and replaced.
        8. The 3 groups of defendants in the case (Judicial, Executive, legislative) were all served with the Appeals Brief and were given time by the Circuit Court to file an opposition.
        9. The legislative and executive defendants filed their opposition Briefs but the judicial group asked for and received an extension.
        10. Nick and I at that time had completed the legislative response to their opposition filing and were half way through the Executive Brief when the Circuit Court informed us that we could not file separate Reply Briefs for the three groups of defendants. That we had to file just one and that one could not be longer than 7,000 words or about 15 pages.
        11. That made the work we did on the first two replies wasted time.
        12. Because we have no choice we are now working on the single reply and doing it in the format requested. That should be ready by Tuesday of next week.
        13. We have prepared a cover sheet for that filing explaining our contempt for and the unfairness of that Circuit Court Order. The defendants have filed what will be over 70 pages of opposition and we will be allowed only 15 in response.
        14. That is where we stand as of now. If anyone reading this wants to receive updates via email please send a request to [email protected],com

    Leave a Comment 25 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *