Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: NavyLT might find this interesting...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,863

    NavyLT might find this interesting...

    Vet denied gun rights while illegals campaign for Murray

    "So, let me see if I have this straight. According to the Tacoma News Tribune, an admittedly illegal immigrant named Maria Gianni has been doorbelling homes in the Seattle area, working hard to get out the vote for Sen. Patty Murray...

    "Anybody besides this columnist see something wrong with this picture? "




    http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-i...ign-for-murray

    Or try this:

    http://tinyurl.com/24wf2gu

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    SW WA
    Posts
    127
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLT View Post
    2. This whole interstate commerce clause crap. How can they use the interstate commerce clause to regulate something that is not presently in interstate commerce? I can't believe the Constitutionality of that hasn't been challenged and shot down. I mean using that reasoning - that if it EVER moved in interstate commerce the Federal government can regulate it - doesn't that basically mean the Federal government can regulate ANYTHING and EVERYTHING? Is there anything anywhere in this country that some part of has not crossed state lines some time in the past? Is that what the founding fathers really intended?
    More than that. They claim the power to regulate a local product (even home grown by you) if it keeps you from buying something interstate.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

    "A farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed his chickens. The U.S. government had imposed limits on wheat production based on acreage owned by a farmer, in order to drive up wheat prices during the Great Depression, and Filburn was growing more than the limits permitted. Filburn was ordered to destroy his crops and pay a fine, even though he was producing the excess wheat for his own use and had no intention of selling it."

    Bruce
    Last edited by bcp; 10-26-2010 at 09:25 PM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member amlevin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    North of Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    5,953
    Quote Originally Posted by bcp View Post
    More than that. They claim the power to regulate a local product (even home grown by you) if it keeps you from buying something interstate.

    See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn

    "A farmer, Roscoe Filburn, was growing wheat to feed his chickens. The U.S. government had imposed limits on wheat production based on acreage owned by a farmer, in order to drive up wheat prices during the Great Depression, and Filburn was growing more than the limits permitted. Filburn was ordered to destroy his crops and pay a fine, even though he was producing the excess wheat for his own use and had no intention of selling it."

    Bruce
    And the rest of the story was:

    "because Filburn's wheat growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for chicken feed on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, Filburn's production of more wheat than he was allotted was affecting interstate commerce, and so could be regulated by the federal government."

    That's why the US Supreme Court found against him. He was indirectly effecting interstate commerce.
    "If I shoot all the ammo I am carrying I either won't need anymore or more won't help"

    "If you refuse to stand up for others now, who will stand up for you when your time comes?"

  4. #4
    Regular Member amzbrady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Marysville, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,522
    So if there is an "ILLEGAL immigrant" in her group, and Murray knows this, wouldnt that in essence be aiding and abbeding?
    If you voted for Obama to prove you are not a racist...
    what will you do now to prove you are not stupid?

    "The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of "liberalism," they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." - Norman Thomas

    "They who can who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve niether liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin

  5. #5
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    And the rest of the story was:

    "because Filburn's wheat growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for chicken feed on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, Filburn's production of more wheat than he was allotted was affecting interstate commerce, and so could be regulated by the federal government."

    That's why the US Supreme Court found against him. He was indirectly effecting interstate commerce.
    It's still a total misapplication of the clause. And a travesty of justice. Trampling on more than a few rights.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    It's still a total misapplication of the clause. And a travesty of justice. Trampling on more than a few rights.
    It was from the FDR rubber stamp court. They did whatever they wanted. It was a very dark time for the constitution.

    Scary part is we are 1 supreme court justice away from having that sort of supreme court again..
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bedford, Texas, USA
    Posts
    834
    Quote Originally Posted by amlevin View Post
    And the rest of the story was:

    "because Filburn's wheat growing activities reduced the amount of wheat he would buy for chicken feed on the open market, and because wheat was traded nationally, Filburn's production of more wheat than he was allotted was affecting interstate commerce, and so could be regulated by the federal government."

    That's why the US Supreme Court found against him. He was indirectly effecting interstate commerce.
    gonzalez v. raich was the icing on the cake for congress to regulate anything and everything that they wanted to. The USSC pretty much assured congress that even if there was no interstate or intrastate market for a product, they could regulate it as they see fit.

Posting Permissions

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