Marijuana: our ticket to repeal of all federal gun laws

[Freedom1Man]

Still against "gutting" the clause because there is no reason to.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Commerce+Clause

The Commerce Clause authorizes Congress to regulate commerce in order to ensure that the flow of interstate commerce is free from local restraints imposed by various states. When Congress deems an aspect of interstate commerce to be in need of supervision, it will enact legislation that must have some real and rational relation to the subject of regulation. Congress may constitutionally provide for the point at which subjects of interstate commerce become subjects of state law and, therefore, state regulation.

http://theunsolicitedopinion.com/Bill/August 2nd Handout - 3.pdf

So, if anything needed gutting, it is Congress, the courts, and the executive branch. They all need to be replaced with those who know, understand, and follow the constitution and the original intent behind it.

 

[JDPrice]

Absolutely; the clause itself is fine, if left unmolested by beurocrats, and their desire for control

 

[Freedom1Man]

Absolutely; the clause itself is fine, if left unmolested by beurocrats, and their desire for control

Sorry that was not directed at you. That was for Jack House to read.

Thank you for your support though.

 

[Aknazer]

Instead of a complete tear down, why not just re-roof the place?

The problem is that the government has been leaking into where it does not belong.

As fun as a civil war might sound, I would rather get this fixed peacefully.

What good does re-roofing do when it's most things under the roof that need to be replaced? If anything one could say that there's already a decent roof (though it needs a few patches in order to make it more "weatherproof" for modern times), but it's everything that the roof "protects" that needs to be thrown out. The laws and all those that support/make such laws under the "roof" are the problem.


And personally I've never understood how regulating=prohibition, but yet we see it all the time. All of the prohibition laws on drugs, or how OK used the "regulating" bit of it's Constitution to flat-out ban OC (which we finally got back), and tons of other examples across the country.

 

[Freedom1Man]

What good does re-roofing do when it's most things under the roof that need to be replaced? If anything one could say that there's already a decent roof (though it needs a few patches in order to make it more "weatherproof" for modern times), but it's everything that the roof "protects" that needs to be thrown out. The laws and all those that support/make such laws under the "roof" are the problem.


And personally I've never understood how regulating=prohibition, but yet we see it all the time. All of the prohibition laws on drugs, or how OK used the "regulating" bit of it's Constitution to flat-out ban OC (which we finally got back), and tons of other examples across the country.

It was explained in a later post.

Re-roofing was a bad example. It's not like the roof was leaking, or that the structure was bad, the 'water' that looked like it came from a leak in the roof was in fact that the renters (congress) were urinating all over everything while the rental agency (the judges) stood back and encouraged the activity. The structure and roof are fine we've just got to clean the house.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

What good does re-roofing do when it's most things under the roof that need to be replaced? If anything one could say that there's already a decent roof (though it needs a few patches in order to make it more "weatherproof" for modern times), but it's everything that the roof "protects" that needs to be thrown out. The laws and all those that support/make such laws under the "roof" are the problem.


And personally I've never understood how regulating=prohibition, but yet we see it all the time. All of the prohibition laws on drugs, or how OK used the "regulating" bit of it's Constitution to flat-out ban OC (which we finally got back), and tons of other examples across the country.

You are right regulation isn't supposed to equal prohibition, like many other words that have -ate at the end of it Regulate was supposed to mean to make regular. Commerce simply meant trade, the commerce clause was to ensure that free and regular trade occurred between the states. The founders realized that the over taxation and restrictions on free trade between the European states was not good for the people or their pocket books. It is why U.S. was able to raise it's level of living so fast and so well.

I say the analogy is pretty close, because the frame of the house or of our federalization as sold to the citizenry wasn't a bad idea, but no sooner than it was instituted, those in power started drilling holes into it.