Mike McCalister, Florida GOP Senate Candidate, Brings Back Second Amendment Remedies

WASHINGTON -- The idea that gun rights could be used to ward off an overreaching federal government was a concept introduced to public in early 2010, when Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle spoke of "Second Amendment remedies."

Two years and Angle's tough election loss later, the idea remains in vogue in some conservative circles. Florida Senate candidate Mike McCalister, who is running against incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), offered a variation of the much-lampooned line during a speech before the Palms West Republican Club earlier this week.

"I get asked sometimes where do I stand on the Second and 10th Amendment, and I have a little saying," he declared. "We need a sign at every harbor, every airport and every road entering our state: 'You're entering a 10th Amendment-owned and -operated state, and justice will be served with the Second Amendment.'"

McCalister's comment, which was recorded by the Democratic opposition research group American Bridge, plays to the states' rights dogma that dominates GOP politics. That said, the suggestion that firearms will be brought to bear against the federal government isn't precisely a fixture of Republican Party talking points. Angle's declaration that "if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies" earned her lasting criticism.

McCalister already has suffered from a few campaign-related gaffes, mostly dealing with an embellished biography. But Democrats still see him as in play for the nomination. He's running against former U.S. Sen. George LeMieux and former Florida state House Majority Leader Adam Hasner.

A request for comment to the McCalister campaign was not immediately returned.

Comments

[staysane]

12:59 AM on 12/23/2011

You left out Rep. Connie Mack from Ft. Myers...he will be a formidable challenger...

[gfmucci]

03:01 PM on 12/04/2011

You may never hear from the McCallister camp. They aren't evem forthcoming with questions from Republicans on occasion based on personal experience. He is one of the less transparent candidates I've ever met.

[dbrett480]

03:35 PM on 11/12/2011

His quote is completely misinterpreted. The 10th Amendment simply gives states the power to regulate things not already laid out in the Constitution. I don't see how that can mean guns will be used against the federal government.

[Rooster Coburn]

05:00 PM on 11/12/2011

Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

[legaleagle 45]

11:10 AM on 11/12/2011

Sam Stien wrote: "That said, the suggestion that firearms will be brought to bear against the federal government isn't precisely a fixture of Republican Party talking points. "

I see nothing in McCalister remarks which suggests that firearms be brought to bear against the federal government, Sam. Look at the comment again: . "We need a sign at every harbor, every airport and every road entering our state: 'You're entering a 10th Amendment-owned and -operated state, and justice will be served with the Second Amendment.'"

It seems to me that this is a warning to newcomers that the residents are armed and you better not mess with them.

That is not to say that McCalister's remarks are not subject to criticism, as it appears that McCalister is invoking vigilante activity rather than the proper purpose of self defense when he invokes the 2nd in conjunction with "justice will be served with the 2nd Amend."

Self defense in not "serving justice" and should never be seen as a substitute for justice. It is an appropriate response to to certain threats, but it is not justice and should never be asserted as such.

[montestruc]

06:12 PM on 11/11/2011

ROTFLOL--- the united states of america was founded on a "2nd amendment remedy" to an overreaching British Government that attempted (unsuccessfully, fatally so) in 1775 to disarm what had to then been law abiding colonists in Lexington & Concord. Read some history will ya?

[Chi Man Sam]

09:21 PM on 11/11/2011

Civil war, hiw did that work out.
Its perception who was right, and
who's wrong. Today people still talk
about succeeding from the union
yet forget about the civil and all bloodshed
and lives that were lost.
2nd amendment remedies aren't always just.

[Mark0]

07:11 AM on 11/12/2011

While I agree that "2nd amendment remedies" may not always be just, these statements regarded as "2nd amendment remedies" are largely political rhetoric, as are the statements opposing them. No amount of political posturing detracts from the necessity of second amendment as an important check in our system of checks and balances.

That said, there is something of a differenece between succession and justified correction of an illegitimate government power.

[Mark0]

07:14 AM on 11/12/2011

While I doubt anyone has any real desire to return America to a state of civil war, and most would like to move away from the current civil unrest, it is worth mentioning that the civil war was responsible for drawing the era of American slavery to a close.

[montestruc]

11:47 AM on 11/12/2011

No one said they were always just. However the basic theory of American government is consent of the governed. Furthermore the War between the states was called that for good reason. The dispute was between one group of state governments (and associated state milita units now called national guard units) and the rest of the states plus the federal government and associated military formations.

You ought to know that.

[Gestas]

12:58 PM on 11/11/2011

I wonder if the 2nd. Amendment protects Pitchforks...?...

[legaleagle 45]

11:12 AM on 11/12/2011

Not fully automatic assualt pitchforks.

[RevJimIII]

10:17 PM on 11/12/2011

Tac black pitchfork with extended tines and a green dot laser...

[kareemachan]

12:57 PM on 11/11/2011

Gotta marvel at how these TP/NOPers think that violent rhetoric is okay and de riguer. It's so very, very Christian of them, isn't it?

[Chi Man Sam]

12:54 PM on 11/11/2011

Fearful little men always try to intimidate
with threats that are unfounded, a weapon
should only be used as a last resort, if you have
a weapon thats not for hunting, hide an keep it
safe. To t5ry to brag or appeal to the NRA'ers
is childish.

[montestruc]

08:27 PM on 11/11/2011

Used as a last resort yes, but making the other side understand clearly and with no ambiguity that if pushed into a corner, deadly force will be used is not the same thing as use of that force, nor is it criminal to make clear that you will defend yourself.

If you do not understand the distinction, that's your problem.

[Chi Man Sam]

09:15 PM on 11/11/2011

Being a former soldier I know how and when to use deadly force, I don't play video games or paintball. I don't need to brag or talk about it, I do it, Advertising you have weapons and might be able to pull the trigger might being the key word as many failed even in combat, only gives the wrong person an opportunity to wait till your gone and rob your home, also to take a shot before you draw. I've always found those who talk the most act the less.
If you do not understand the distinction, that's really your problem.

By the way he wasn't talking about common criminals.

[Mark0]

07:34 AM on 11/12/2011

" if you have a weapon thats not for hunting, hide an keep it safe. "

Why should a "weapon thats not for hunting" need to be hidden?

Hunting is not protected under the constitution.
The right to keep and bear arms, and do so specifically in order to maintain a free state is.

[Chi Man Sam]

08:05 AM on 11/12/2011

How many guns get stolen and then
used for another crime, how many children'find there parents guns and accidently shoot themselves or a friend.
I guess you have never heard that happen on the news.

[Rooster Coburn]

12:45 PM on 11/11/2011

He is right. We hear a lot about the Second Amendment but not nearly enough about the Ninth and Tenth Amendments. Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

[simplecitizen]

12:10 PM on 11/11/2011

We do not need to fear outside forces. We need to fear for our country from inside forces that would preach its destruction by cloaking themselves in our Constitution. Just as Sharon Angle was defeated at the ballot box so will this latest radical Mr. McCallister.

[Lost Rights]

11:42 AM on 11/11/2011

"We need a sign at every harbor, every airport and every road entering our state: 'You're entering a 10th Amendment-owned and -operated state, and justice will be served with the Second Amendment.'"

What is he saying, that we all should carry guns because of 'them furiner terrorists" gotta be watched by civilian what, vigilantes?

The idea that gun rights could be used to ward off an overreaching federal government was a concept introduced to public in early 2010, when Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle spoke of "Second Amendment remedies."

Sharon Angle is even more confused. Whom does she figure they are going to use the second amendment remedy on? Is she inciting rebellion? She is talking terrorist rhetoric, but no Homeland Security people do anything. I guess rich people and politicians are above the DHS scrutiny. The only people they would presumable use them on Congress, but the first they will have to fend of the us Army, and all the Military, and local law. Just look what kind of force the local police forces are presenting against the Occupy movement.
Sure Sharon, I want to see you and your idiot friends pull out your guns and threaten anyone! Phony and stupid.

[Berettasskeeter]

02:41 PM on 11/11/2011

No, it was introduced in 1775, actually. And don't you know, it worked!
Semper fi

[Mark0]

07:39 AM on 11/12/2011

"The idea that gun rights could be used to ward off an overreachi­ng federal government was a concept introduced to public in early 2010, when Nevada Republican Senate candidate Sharron Angle spoke of "Second Amendment remedies."

No. The idea that gun rights could be used to ward off an overreachi­ng federal government was a concept that brought about the Second Amendment. It is not some kind of vogue new notion.

[den1953]

11:30 AM on 11/11/2011

Very good idea this candidate has follow the Sharon Angles political adventure and you'll end up just like she did good luck with that there skippy!

[DrObvious]

10:29 AM on 11/11/2011

The article lead sentence says: "The idea that gun rights could be used to ward off an overreaching federal government was a concept introduced to public in early 2010,"-------- Well, that's false. Resistance to an over-reaching government was very much on the minds of the constitutional framers when the 2nd amendment was drafted originally. 2010 was when it was brought up without a shred of justification by political neanderthal Sharron Angle. And now some fool in Florida talks tough .... perhaps he's buddies of those Georgia fellas who got drunk, climbed in the truck all chock full of weapons, and headed to Tennessee to hold court officials hostage? Finally, it's important to note that our system of justice is not built on a 2nd amendment bedrock, but rather 1st, 4th, 5th and 14th amendment bedrocks. We specifically do not administer justice via the 2nd amendment. Tool

[legaleagle 45]

06:01 PM on 11/11/2011

The 6th, 7th and 8th as well. The 2nd is not an element of our system of justice, but rather an element of our checks and balances.

[librldem]

10:16 AM on 11/11/2011

Don't forget this is flori-duh where whackdoodles like Rubio and West get elected also too!

[nbb]

10:17 AM on 11/11/2011

Preach it, Brother! It may sell well to your peeps, but I credit the people of Florida voters with sense enough that this kind of demagoguery will not lead to election to the US Senate.