rscottie
Regular Member
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and President's, Politicians, and the Supreme Court have been doing everything they can since our countries founding to get around what they did not like about it.
The Supreme Court is supposed to be the final arbitrator in determining if a law fits within the confines of the Constitution.
As I am not a lawyer, I do not care about the minutia of the wording of this or that law, case law, etc, but instead care about the outcome.
I know what the 2nd Amendment says. I know what the Founders said about the bearing of arms and their intentions of acknowledging that right by making it number 2 in the top 10 list.
It does not take a lawyer to know that the citizens of this country are being sold down the road by bad politicians that would like nothing better than to disarm us piece by piece so that they can take even more of our liberties. They would love to disarm us to pass more tax laws in order to steal more and more of our hard earned money to give to the voting groups that will keep them in power. They are a disgrace to the ideals this country was founded upon.
No one has answered my question yet on whether they think it would be OK for New York City to pass a law banning the King James Bible? I mean, if we are talking about States Rights? (I am a believer that only People have rights, States have Powers, powers that are constrained by the Constitution and Bill of Rights) The City has no more power to ban the King James Bible than to ban law abiding citizens the right to bear arms there.
I also think that Permits are not Constitutional. Would Christians pay for a Permit to carry the King James Bible? Would Muslims pay for a Permit to carry the Koran?
Why should we stand for the issuance of Permits to exercise our Natural Right of bearing Arms for Self-Defense, a right recognized and acknowledged by the 2nd Amendment?
We should not.
The Supreme Court is supposed to be the final arbitrator in determining if a law fits within the confines of the Constitution.
As I am not a lawyer, I do not care about the minutia of the wording of this or that law, case law, etc, but instead care about the outcome.
I know what the 2nd Amendment says. I know what the Founders said about the bearing of arms and their intentions of acknowledging that right by making it number 2 in the top 10 list.
It does not take a lawyer to know that the citizens of this country are being sold down the road by bad politicians that would like nothing better than to disarm us piece by piece so that they can take even more of our liberties. They would love to disarm us to pass more tax laws in order to steal more and more of our hard earned money to give to the voting groups that will keep them in power. They are a disgrace to the ideals this country was founded upon.
No one has answered my question yet on whether they think it would be OK for New York City to pass a law banning the King James Bible? I mean, if we are talking about States Rights? (I am a believer that only People have rights, States have Powers, powers that are constrained by the Constitution and Bill of Rights) The City has no more power to ban the King James Bible than to ban law abiding citizens the right to bear arms there.
I also think that Permits are not Constitutional. Would Christians pay for a Permit to carry the King James Bible? Would Muslims pay for a Permit to carry the Koran?
Why should we stand for the issuance of Permits to exercise our Natural Right of bearing Arms for Self-Defense, a right recognized and acknowledged by the 2nd Amendment?
We should not.