"A Convention of the States" Debate: Farris vs. Marshall (August 28th)

Is Carry allowed at and inside Colgan Theater?



Download this flyer HERE.

HERE is the MAP to the event.

It's NOVA, CC is allowed by students and faculty with conditions according to policy if I recall. On mobile now so it's not easy for me to search for it for you.

http://www.nvcc.edu/current-students/police/college-safety/policies/

Firearms/Dangerous Weapons and Materials Policy

NOVA’s weapons on campus policy defines “weapons” and identifies who may carry them on campus. A process to grant exceptions, and potential responses to violations. This policy contains the following general provisions:

The only persons who are authorized to bring weapons on campus and into NOVA buildings and college-sponsored events are currently sworn and certified law enforcement officers.
NOVA faculty, staff and students, if they hold a valid concealed carry permit, may bring a weapon on campus but it must be secured in a locked vehicle and completely out of sight. Under no circumstances are NOVA personnel allowed to carry a weapon (either in open view or concealed) on NOVA grounds, bring a weapon into a building, or carry a weapon at a NOVA event.
Visitors, not affiliated with the College, are entitled to carry a weapon in plain view on public property within or adjoining a campus. However, they may not bring a weapon into a NOVA building or a sponsored college event.

The Policy may be reviewed in its entirety at the NOVA Police website. (Link: http://www.nvcc.edu/current-students/police/doc/weapons-policy.pdf )

I think we need little words so that judges understand ...

davidmcbeth said:

I think we need little words so that judges understand ...

Click to expand...

We had a guy who used big words, and lots of folks submitting stuff with little words. He lost. We continue to suffer.

Amazing how folks around here remember their history. [further snarky comment deleted by author prior to posting.]

stay safe.

2/3 then 3/4...simple.

OC for ME said:

2/3 then 3/4...simple.

Click to expand...

Which is why the thought of a CanCon scares the living stuff out of me.

Once you gavel it open there's no limit on what can be proposed, nor how the mob with credentials will respond - unlike the formative years where delegations from the various colonies had specific instrutions or felt the ethical/moral need to write back home for clarification or guidance on an issue that had not been anticipated.

stay safe.

Constitutional Convention.

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men...........the Shadow knows!

I see no need to open that can of worms.

Pointless

I know mark levin is a big pusher of this. I listen to him; but i agree this is a bad idea. We already have a constitution that is Disregarded when inconvienant, so how would (best case) adding more ammendments to be disregarded benifit anyone?

conhntr said:

I know mark levin is a big pusher of this. I listen to him; but i agree this is a bad idea. We already have a constitution that is Disregarded when inconvienant, so how would (best case) adding more ammendments to be disregarded benifit anyone?

Click to expand...

Those new amendments would allow the disregarding of other amendments. Keep up with the narrative, please.

stay safe.

false premise

The flyer itself reveals one of the false premises of the ArtV movement: ArtV only offers a way for the states to initiate the process to amend the Constitution. Thereafter, there's no guarantee that they'd have direct hands-on involvement. It's possible that they could, but only to the extent that Congress lets them.

Let's not forget, we already supposedly have representatives at the currently convened convention authorized to propose amendments. They're our senators and representatives in Congress. Somehow once they show up for their first day of work, they transform into federal employees - satrap governors of jurisdictions, representing the interests of the federal "authority" - instead of our representatives sitting at the table guiding our federal institution-servant.

Levin’s Risky Proposal: A Constitutional Convention

Levin’s Risky Proposal: A Constitutional Convention
http://www.jbs.org/legislation/levin-s-risky-proposal-a-constitutional-convention

ChristCrusader said:

The flyer itself reveals one of the false premises of the ArtV movement: ArtV only offers a way for the states to initiate the process to amend the Constitution. Thereafter, there's no guarantee that they'd have direct hands-on involvement. It's possible that they could, but only to the extent that Congress lets them.

Click to expand...

This is a myth. When an Article V convention is called, the Federal government in its entirety is removed from the process. If 2/3 of the states call a convention and pass amendments they immediately go to the states for ratification. 3/4 of the states (38) are needed for ratification. Once ratified the amendments become the law of the land. Constitution amended. This method removes the federal government.

All amendments must be ratified by a 3/4 majority. The proposal process begins one of two ways:

1. House / Senate proposes and passes amendment with a 2/3 majority

2. Article V convention of States proposes and passes amendment with a 2/3 majority

The common theme is the state ratification process.

gearup said:

This is a myth. When an Article V convention is called, the Federal government in its entirety is removed from the process. If 2/3 of the states call a convention and pass amendments they immediately go to the states for ratification. 3/4 of the states (38) are needed for ratification. Once ratified the amendments become the law of the land. Constitution amended. This method removes the federal government.

All amendments must be ratified by a 3/4 majority. The proposal process begins one of two ways:

1. House / Senate proposes and passes amendment with a 2/3 majority

2. Article V convention of States proposes and passes amendment with a 2/3 majority

The common theme is the state ratification process.

Click to expand...

"The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, [Congress] shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate."
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/article-v.html

Click to expand...

ArtV, can be triggered by 2/3 of the states, but it just forces Congress to call a convention - it doesn't guarantee that the states will be directly involved in the convention, nor does it guarantee that the participants in the convention will do as the states want them to do.
Furthermore, the ratification process thereafter can be done by conventions in 3/4 of the states, rather than the state legislatures, if Congress so deems it.

That's all if the Constitution is attempted to be merely amended, rather than altogether replaced like the run-away scenario when they replaced the Articles of Confederation with our current Constitution - the reason this states' method of ArticleV process has been avoided for over 225 years!

I Propose a Convention

To dissolve the union and abolish the corporate contract.