Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: New Hampshire passes resolution that immediately Voids Several Federal Laws

  1. #1
    Regular Member cowboyridn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    436

    Post imported post

    I was emailed this today, and find it interesting but I question giving the statestotal power with respect to the 2nd amendment, we can't even get our state to allow CCW. I also noticed the date on the resolution 2009

    Link to the enactment

    http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legi...9/HCR0006.html






    The New Hampshire state legislature took an unbelievably bold step Monday by introducing a resolution to declare certain actions by the federal government to completely totally void and warning that certain future acts will be viewed as a "breach of peace" with the states themselves that risks nullifying the Constitution."



    This act by New Hampshire is a clear warning to the federal government that they could face being stripped of their power by the States (presumably through civil war!).

    The remarkable document outlines with perfect clarity, some basics long forgotten. For instance, it reminds Congress "That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and no other crimes whatsoever;. . . . . therefore all acts of Congress which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force;"



    • Federal gun crime laws? Void.
    • Federal drug crime laws? Void.
    • [size=The other federal criminal laws that deal with anything other than the specific enumerated crimes? ALL VOID.]
    One would think that if any lawyer anywhere in the entire country was worth his salt, all federal criminal trials would have ended years ago. This seems to prove that most lawyers are dullards.

    New Hampshire deals a complete death blow to the pending federal hate crimes legislation by pointing out "That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force;. . . . ."

    Later in the Resolution, New Hampshire makes clear what the feds are now risking if they proceed further: The removal of all powers from the federal government by the States!

    Quoting directly from the Resolution:




    "That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:



    I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.

    II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.


    III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

    IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.

    V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

    VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State's legislature.









    The enforcement proposal follows:



    We have followed with great interest the debate over the Arizona Immigration Law. If those who are speaking out truly understood the provisions of our Constitution we may have a more informed debate. It's obvious that most of the public has no concept, or knowledge of what the Constitution really says.



    The only place in the Federal Constitution that any law enforcement powers are granted is in Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 15, where the law enforcement powers are granted to the Militia. Congress is given the power to call forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions. There are no other law enforcement powers granted anywhere else in the Constitution. The words Police, Marshall, Agent, Sheriff, Prosecutor, or any form of them, do not appear anywhere in the Constitution.



    The Militias belong to the States and the next paragraph states thatthe Federal Government is to see that the militias are armed, but the States are responsible for the training, and the appointment of officers.



    MostState Constitutions says the same thing as the Federal Constitution: The Militia is to be called up to execute the Laws of the State, to suppress Insurrections, and repel Invasions.



    One more point, the National Guard is not the Militia. The Militia isdefined as all able bodied men between the ages of 18 and up. The top age varies according to the various State Constitutions. Neither the National Guard, nor any organized police power in the Federal Government or any of the several State Governments can lawfully claim to bethe Militia.



    The StateConstitutions say words to the following effect: The Governor shall be Commander-in-Chief of the military forces of the State, except when they shall be called into the service of the United States. He shall have power to call out the militia to execute the laws, to suppress insurrection, or to repel invasion.



    If Arizona had used the powers in the Federal Constitution and the Arizona Constitution and simply called out the Militia, there would be no room for any argument. -- Except some may contend that the influx of Illegal aliens is not an Invasion.



    Now, to the crux of the matter.



    The Federal Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Paragraph 16, requires the Federal Government to Provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.



    Clearly the Militia belongs to the States. The States have the power to appoint the officers and train the men.



    We think, that in view of our enlighten age we now live in. the Militia should be all able bodied men and women between the ages of 18 and 65.



    Once the Governor has restored the Militia, then the State needs to turn to the Federal Government and DEMAND the arms required to be distributed toall able bodied men and women in the State be immediately provided. That should end all discussions about gun laws, and give the State an army to defend itself from any invasion of its sovereign territory.





  2. #2
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    what?! heracy! secceeding from the obamination?!

  3. #3
    Regular Member cowboyridn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    436

    Post imported post


  4. #4
    Regular Member johnny amish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    High altitude of Vernon County, ,
    Posts
    1,025

    Post imported post

    Looks like freedom is on their minds, sounds good.
    "To sin by silence, when we should protest makes cowards out of men."
    Ella Wheeler Cox


    We must contact our lawmakers today, tomorrow and the next day to remind them of Constitutional Carry.
    Laws are not written because of the actions of many, they are wrtiten because of the inactions of many.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Claremont, New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    88

    Post imported post

    It has not been passed into law yet so I have no idea what your basing the title of your post off of? All the news paper clipping's you posted said he INDERDUCED it and then the NHgencourt link you posted says the same thing that the bill was interduced in the 2009 SESSIONno where does it say it passed. In fact running a simple internet search brings up nothing other then talk about the bill no where can I find anything that says it was voted on and passed nor can I find any news clippings that say the gov signed HCR6 into law. so you may want to edit your thread title as it's not true.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    Still though..., it is a good idea from The New Hampshire General Court.

    As the saying goes in New Hampshire..., 'Live Free or Die!'

    Cudos to New Hampshire for standing up to The Federal Government!, even if it is only a Resolution at this point.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Southern NH, New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    Even if it had passed, it's a resolution and would have no weight of law behind it.



  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    I know..., it is just the Formality behind The Resolution that caught my attention.

    Nevertheless, though, I like the sound of New Hampshire telling The Federal Government to leave The Free State alone.

    I would not be surprised if the next Resolution would be one of Succesion from the Union.

  9. #9
    Regular Member johnny amish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    High altitude of Vernon County, ,
    Posts
    1,025

    Post imported post

    The last time succession was attempted we fought in a civil war. Our government won't allow anybody to go anywhere.
    "To sin by silence, when we should protest makes cowards out of men."
    Ella Wheeler Cox


    We must contact our lawmakers today, tomorrow and the next day to remind them of Constitutional Carry.
    Laws are not written because of the actions of many, they are wrtiten because of the inactions of many.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605

    Post imported post

    We will just have to wait and see what happends.

  11. #11
    Regular Member virginiatuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Loudoun County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    johnny amish wrote:
    The last time succession was attempted we fought in a civil war. Our government won't allow anybody to go anywhere.
    secession

  12. #12
    Regular Member johnny amish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    High altitude of Vernon County, ,
    Posts
    1,025

    Post imported post

    virginiatuck wrote:
    johnny amish wrote:
    The last time succession was attempted we fought in a civil war. Our government won't allow anybody to go anywhere.
    secession
    Sorry, sometimes the typing gets in the way of the thinking.
    "To sin by silence, when we should protest makes cowards out of men."
    Ella Wheeler Cox


    We must contact our lawmakers today, tomorrow and the next day to remind them of Constitutional Carry.
    Laws are not written because of the actions of many, they are wrtiten because of the inactions of many.

  13. #13
    Regular Member virginiatuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Loudoun County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    788

    Post imported post

    johnny amish wrote:
    virginiatuck wrote:
    johnny amish wrote:
    The last time succession was attempted we fought in a civil war. Our government won't allow anybody to go anywhere.
    secession
    Sorry, sometimes the typing gets in the way of the thinking.
    Just wanted to be clear, in case someone thought you were talking about hereditary succession or titles of nobility. The last time that was attempted, we fought in a revolutionary war.

    It helps with searches, in case someone wants to search the forum for secession; however unrelated that may be.

Posting Permissions

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