Filed Monday, October 6, 2008:
Don Hamrick v. President George W. Bush, U.S. District Court for DC, No. 08-cv-1698-EGS. (Assigned to Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, the same judge in the Park v. DC case: I will file Motion for Recusal for bias and motion for the Chief Judge to be assigned. I can do that because I am an unrepresented civil plaintiff.).
See pages 1-4 in the lawsuit above (after the Table of Contents) for my July 4, 2008 letter to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and their letter in response!
Patriots Day, April 19, 2002
Like the British at Lexington and Concord, Massachusetts on April 19, 1775, the U.S. Coast Guard in Washington, DC on April 19, 2002 denied my Second Amendment application for an endorsement for “National Open Carry Handgun” on my Merchant Mariner’s Document (ID Card) in recognition of federally required Small Arms Training for U.S. merchant seamen as a pre-requisite to taking employment aboard U.S. Government vessels operated by the Military Sealift Command. This is morally analagous to the British at Lexington and Concord that triggered the American Revolution. I have been fighting for my Second Amendment rights from that point on through today. I am now broke and need help!
WHERE IS THE NRA?
I told the NRA about the historical comparison between the Coast Guard’s Final Agency Action and the British at Lexington and Concord but the NRA ignored me because my pursuit for National Open Carry conflicted with their National Reciprocity for Concealed Carry. I believe the NRA is only interested in prolonging the battle over gun control to extend their financial longevity with perpetual fundraising activities.
FOR PROOF OF NRA HYPOCRISY CLICK THE LINK TO READ
THE 2002 LETTER FROM NRA ATTORNEY ROBERT DOWLUT
REFUSING NRA INVOLVEMENT IN THE
HOLY GRAIL OF A SECOND AMENDMENT CASE:
NATIONAL OPEN CARRY HANDGUN
See NRA ATTORNEY ROBERT DOWLUT 2002 LETTER REFUSING TO HELP DON HAMRICK WITH HIS SECOND AMENDMENT CASE!
The Second Amendment as a Human Rights Complaint!
U.S. DISTRICT COURT FOR DC (AND)
THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
In 2005 Jessica Gonzales (now Lenahan) was the first to file a human rights complaint against the United States with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). Her human rights petition challenges the U.S. Supreme Court’s “no individual right to police protection” doctrine. Her human rights complaint is Petition No. 1490-05 was accepted by the IACHR. The next step is the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
In 2006 I was the first person to file a human rights complaint against the United States at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) for 4-years of wrongful denials of my Seventh Amendment right to a civil jury trial in the federal courts over the Second Amendment from a U.S. merchant seaman’s point of view involving the right to personal safety and security in intrastate, interstate, and maritime travel. My human rights complaint at IACHR is Petition No. 1142-06. My human rightws complaint at IACHR is still pending.
On July 4th, 2008 (Independence Day) I became the first person to submit the U.S. Supreme Court’s Heller opinion (Justice Scalia) on the Second Amendment as evidence supporting my human rights complaint against the United States at the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
I filed notice with IACHR that my human rights complaint provides the counter-balance to Jessica Gonzales (now Lenahan)’s human rights complaint against the United States on the U.S. Supreme Court’s “no individual right to police protection doctrine” on the basis that if we are denied police protection then we have the constitutional right to seek personal security and safety under the Second Amendment under the privileges and immunities of the Fourteenth Amendment (incorporation doctrine).
My lawsuit sues the United States for violations of my constitutional rights and my human rights. I am also employing the jus tertii doctrine to sue for the rights of third parties (i.e., the unorganized militia under 10 U.S.C. § 311(b)(2); U.S. merchant seamen, truck drivers, and the law-abiding American people at large).
Where I could really use help from the NRA is with the Ex Parte Young Doctrine to sue the governors of the 50 States because a State cannot be sued by a citizen of another State under the Eleventh Amendment (confer Chisholm v. Georgia 2 U.S. (2 Dall.) 419 (1793)). See also Randy E. Barnett, The People or the State?: Chisolm v. Georgia and Popular Sovereignty. If I were to employ the Ex Parte Young Doctrine to add the governors of the 50 States as defendants the cost of printing my lawsuit may be as much as $3,000. The NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund can help me with this, even as a short-term loan as a merchant seaman. The NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund was established by the NRA Board of Directors in 1978 to become involved in court cases establishing legal precedents in favor of gun owners. To accomplish this, the Fund provides legal and financial assistance to selected individuals and organizations defending their right to keep and bear arms.
But the NRA continues to ignore my Second Amendment case because I am pursuing the Holy Grail of Second Amendment rights: National Open Carry as a constitutional right and as a human right. The NRA’s agenda is National Reciprocity for Concealed Carry.
I need $800 to get my case printed, copied, and filed at the U.S. District Court for DC with copies left over for the NRA, SAF, and other Second Amendment groups for their education on my lawsuit with $245 left over to renew my passport and merchant mariner’s ID card with the U.S. Coast Guard so I can get back to work to payback that $800 (or the $3,000 if I were to really make a big splash suing the governors of the 50 States along with the United States).