Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: AB1934: Analyzed

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Placentia, CA, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    I've written an in depth article on AB1934 covering the unconstitutionality of state and federal infringements of the 2nd amendment, added compelling and substantiated statistics showing that guns work and gun control doesn't, and I even examined parts of the bill on who it arms, the punishments, etc.

    Please read, please support, please spread.

    http://www.examiner.com/x-47206-Sant...is-in-jeopardy

    Thanks!

    Chris

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Oakland, CA., ,
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    Well written Chris. Thanks.

  3. #3
    Regular Member stuckinchico's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Stevenson, Alabama, United States
    Posts
    506

    Post imported post

    :celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate :celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate:celebrate

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Clovis, California, USA
    Posts
    81

    Post imported post

    Very well said!

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Placentia, CA, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Thank you all very much. You all keep the fire of Liberty strongly burning when you give feedback to writers defending the Constitution and Natural Rights as you have.

    Thanks!

    Chris

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    "Hoity-toity" Palo Alto, California, USA
    Posts
    103

    Post imported post

    Hey Chris,

    I really enjoyed reading your article.

    Do you have anything related to McDonald vs. Chicago and State sovereignty?
    Do you believe that the McDonald case is approaching Chicago's handgun law from the right direction?
    Do you think that incorporation will encumber Constitutional Carry states?



  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Placentia, CA, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    tall_tree wrote:
    Hey Chris,

    I really enjoyed reading your article.

    Do you have anything related to McDonald vs. Chicago and State sovereignty?
    Do you believe that the McDonald case is approaching Chicago's handgun law from the right direction?
    Do you think that incorporation will encumber Constitutional Carry states?

    Those questions right there are what we need to overcome. The federal government, the state government, and the local counties have NO authority to disarm their citizenry. Every amendment is in fact incorporated and applies to all levels of government.

    Our founding fathers observed inalienable rights that were endowed by our creator/mother nature. These inalienable rights are your right to life, liberty, and what ever property you've gathered from those two given the absence of fraud and coercion. Whether you're athiest (mother nature) or god (creator) natural law still applies because life was not given to us by any government, it was granted by a supreme entity. Therefore the right to defend one's self is a right to the individual alone.

    We as a society have a golden rule which is enjoy your life, liberty, and property as long as it does not affect mine. We do have reasonable limitations on these such as punishment for yelling fire as a joke in a crowded building causing others harm, we may also have punishment for violent gun bearing offenders to disarm them for a period of time until they can prove they will not deprive another of their liberty.

    The status quo has effectively lead us to believe that government somehow has a right to simply deny liberty when a person has never violated another's liberty with a self defense tool.

    Our supreme court, legislatures, and executives believe that somehow they can bend and twist the meaning of the Constitution, which they have done. That is why the Founding Fathers, upon Declaring Independence, spoke of inalenable rights, and the right of the people to alter or abolish the government as they see fit.

    The Constitution is a contract granted to those who would participate as civil servants in government to protect natural rights and nothing more. The supreme power in the land is WE THE PEOPLE. That is why the Constitution begins with We the People NOT he the president, they the congress, or they the supreme court.

    Therefore going back to the main point. Remaining armed FORCES the government to use jurisprudence in conducing their affairs as said by the Father of the Constitution James Madison:

    But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.
    Please whatever anyone does... do not give into evil, and proceed ever more boldly against it. (Mises Institute motto) We are experiencing a REVOLUTION OF IDEAs and we will win because ideas are bulletproof even in a police state.

    Thanks!

    Chris

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    "Hoity-toity" Palo Alto, California, USA
    Posts
    103

    Post imported post

    Thanks again Chris. Great response.

    I ask those questions after listening to a podcast yesterday discussing the McDonald case, and how it is possible absolute disaster in terms of State/Individual sovereignty.

    I guess only time will tell.

    Thanks again.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Placentia, CA, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Oh anytime and you're welcome. We the People need to enforce the contract we've given those the opportunity to govern us. If we don't enforce the contract to be governed, which is the Constitution, then no one will.

    I'm open to discussion anytime.

    Have a great day!

    Chris

  10. #10
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    I wonder how much infringment the SCOTUS will hand down on an right that shall not be infringed.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  11. #11
    Regular Member XDSTEEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico
    Posts
    216

    Post imported post

    Hey did you guys see this Video on youtube?

    http://www.youtube.com/v/2rbZqD9y1qs...en_US&fs=1

    ?
    Patrick Henry didn't say "Give me safety , or give me death". Liberty is what America is about.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Post imported post

    XDSTEEL wrote:
    Hey did you guys see this Video on youtube?

    http://www.youtube.com/v/2rbZqD9y1qs...en_US&fs=1

    ?
    The balloon poping...the plastic baby....yeah, it's been around on another thread.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Placentia, CA, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Given the composition of the court... I would imagine they will infringe more frequently in the future.

    One thing I did not mention is that the Sheriff is the supreme executive authority of a county, whose authority supersedes the Governor of the State and the President of the United States. The office of the Sheriff is the most directly elected law enforcement official in the land. Therefore, Sheriffs are the last line of defense of freedom until the people must take action as the supreme interpreters of the law of the land. The Sheriff may forbid the enforcement of Federal or State Law. Perfect example, Sheriff Richard Mack.

  14. #14
    Regular Member XDSTEEL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Las Cruces, New Mexico
    Posts
    216

    Post imported post

    Gundude wrote:
    XDSTEEL wrote:
    Hey did you guys see this Video on youtube?

    http://www.youtube.com/v/2rbZqD9y1qs...en_US&fs=1

    ?
    The balloon poping...the plastic baby....yeah, it's been around on another thread.
    oh well i just saw it on youtube kinda BS
    Patrick Henry didn't say "Give me safety , or give me death". Liberty is what America is about.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ontario, California, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    WELL WRITTEN with lots of info I havent seen before.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Placentia, CA, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Please spread this around and make it viral if it rang true in your heart.

  17. #17
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Sons of Liberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Riverside, California, USA
    Posts
    638

    Post imported post

    That was a great article! Very nicely done!

    I will share on my Facebook page.
    Clinging to God & Guns: The Constitution Restoration Project

  18. #18
    Regular Member coolusername2007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Temecula, California, USA
    Posts
    1,660

    Post imported post

    Nicely done.
    "Why should judicial precedent bind the nation if the Constitution itself does not?" -- Mark Levin

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , California, USA
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    ChrisYuhas wrote:
    tall_tree wrote:
    Hey Chris,

    I really enjoyed reading your article.

    Do you have anything related to McDonald vs. Chicago and State sovereignty?
    Do you believe that the McDonald case is approaching Chicago's handgun law from the right direction?
    Do you think that incorporation will encumber Constitutional Carry states?

    Those questions right there are what we need to overcome. The federal government, the state government, and the local counties have NO authority to disarm their citizenry. Every amendment is in fact incorporated and applies to all levels of government.

    Our founding fathers observed inalienable rights that were endowed by our creator/mother nature. These inalienable rights are your right to life, liberty, and what ever property you've gathered from those two given the absence of fraud and coercion. Whether you're athiest (mother nature) or god (creator) natural law still applies because life was not given to us by any government, it was granted by a supreme entity. Therefore the right to defend one's self is a right to the individual alone.

    We as a society have a golden rule which is enjoy your life, liberty, and property as long as it does not affect mine. We do have reasonable limitations on these such as punishment for yelling fire as a joke in a crowded building causing others harm, we may also have punishment for violent gun bearing offenders to disarm them for a period of time until they can prove they will not deprive another of their liberty.

    The status quo has effectively lead us to believe that government somehow has a right to simply deny liberty when a person has never violated another's liberty with a self defense tool.

    Our supreme court, legislatures, and executives believe that somehow they can bend and twist the meaning of the Constitution, which they have done. That is why the Founding Fathers, upon Declaring Independence, spoke of inalenable rights, and the right of the people to alter or abolish the government as they see fit.

    The Constitution is a contract granted to those who would participate as civil servants in government to protect natural rights and nothing more. The supreme power in the land is WE THE PEOPLE. That is why the Constitution begins with We the People NOT he the president, they the congress, or they the supreme court.

    Therefore going back to the main point. Remaining armed FORCES the government to use jurisprudence in conducing their affairs as said by the Father of the Constitution James Madison:

    But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it.
    Please whatever anyone does... do not give into evil, and proceed ever more boldly against it. (Mises Institute motto) We are experiencing a REVOLUTION OF IDEAs and we will win because ideas are bulletproof even in a police state.

    Thanks!

    Chris
    "The supreme power in the land is WE THE PEOPLE. That is why the Constitution begins with We the People NOT he the president, they the congress, or they the supreme court. " ...That belongson a bumber sticker.

    <rant> Come to think of it, this should be engraved into the desk of every politician and posted in every office and hallway of every level of government, and printed at the top of every government memo or document.</rant>



  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Placentia, CA, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    Go ahead. Make it a bumper sticker! Just be sure to "Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. —Thomas Jefferson

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •