NAVY YARD

 

 

Driving a lot of miles today during work, I listened to the radio a lot. The shooting at the Navy Yard in Southeast Washington, D.C. was the main topic. There were endless musings about how the tragedy could have been prevented. “Newstainers” were concerned with the abrupt halt of a dozen lives. They worried about their loved ones. They worried about the deceased shooter, Aaron Alexis, and his troubled mind. They worried about the level of security. How could such a thing be prevented? Should his overseers have nudged him toward getting help? Should he have been given medical help? They wondered how a fellow with several minor incidents of aberrant behavior under his belt have gotten security clearance to work at this and other military facilities.

Naturally, the subject of gun control came up. Can we expect legislation? Are Americans finally “fed up?”

In all this discussion no one mentioned banning guns from military bases. Naturally, police would still be armed. However, imaging machinery could easily be obtained and used to check for firearms. No one bearing a firearm of any kind could enter a military facility. Such facilities fall under the municipal powers of Congress according to the Constitution, and it is a decided matter of law that Congress has “exclusive legislation power” within its municipal realm. The Constitution cannot constraint Congress acting within this jurisdiction. The Seat of government, military bases, depots, territories and the like fall under this unique power. Therefore, claims of violating the Second Amendment would not be valid within Congress’s municipal jurisdiction.

Banning firearms from general use or possession within a military base makes common sense and would have prevented the slaughter at the Navy Yard. No one on the radio news brought this issue to the listeners’ attention.