quote:
Originally posted by EdEKit:
ONE, Jose Padilla, held for over four years without repressentation. US Citizen, NEVER held at Gitmo.
TWO Fre speech zones, applicable also to the right to petition.
THREE The administration has ADMITTED TO ILLEGAL SEARCHES AND ILLEGAL WIRETAPS AND ILLEGAL INSPECTIONS OF COMMUNICATIONS.
FOUR Refusal of the president to accept questions from Democrats in the US congress. Refusal to allow Non Republicans to attend Campaign and PUBLIC POLICY HEARINGS. Refusal to permit Fillibuster in the US Senate. Refusal to allow debate on the Patriot Act. THIS LIST IS THE LONGEST. There are literally thousands of examples of Bush Rejecting, without comment all manner of petitions.
FIVE. European style socialism provides a higher standard of living for the poor of Europe than the USA. Europeans lived with an Aristocratic Elite for Centuries. The Aristocracy and its arrogance was the ONLY CAUSE of the American Revolution, and the French Revolution. You are urging the American Aristocracy to TAKE OVER OUR NATION.
AND FINALLY THE NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT OF 1934. PASSED AND SIGNED DURING THE ADMINISTRATION OF REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT HERBERT HOOVER. And it applies, as ALL federal firearms regulations apply ONLY TO THE INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION OF FIREARMS. NOT THE POSSESSION OF FIREARMS. The arguement that Liberals want to take away firearms is fraudulent. The constitution Allows only state government to regulate the Militia, and ONLY STATE GOVERMENT TO REGULATE THE POSSESSION OF FIREARMS BY THAT "Well Regulated Militia." The mistake you are making is giving the Federal Government a Regulatory Authority that is DENIED IT BY THE TENTH AMENDMENT.
ONE - Padilla has had access to lawyers. Try again genius.
TWO - Give me an example.
THREE - Many wiretaps are done illegally overseas and have been done so by every administration capable of doing them. The same goes with the searches. The Democrats are just as guilty and you don't complain about them.
FOUR - Is this any different than Clinton's illlegal and unconstitutional line item veto? NO it isn't.
FIVE - Go take a closer look at the countries of Europe. The cost of their socialist policies is far greater than what we are spending in Iraq and Afghanistan right now.
The 2nd Amendment - Ed, you don't even have a basic comprehension of the English language. What part of "We The People" don't you understand? Yes, regulated militias are controlled by the individual states. However, the right to own and bear firearms is a personal right. If it is not then the right to free speech is not a personal right either, nor is the right to freedom of religion, nor the right to a fair trial by a jury of your peers, nor any other right you want to claim is a personal right. There are two types of militias defined in the US Constitution. One is a regulated militia, which has become the National Guard, and unregulated militia, which is every male from age 17 to 45 with a few exceptions as defined in the Constitution. The Federal government may regulate firearms only in accordance with interstae commerce, not who can own or bear a firearm. Most states also cannot control who can or cannot own and bear a firearm.
Here are some examples:
Alabama
quote:
"That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state." (Article 1, Section 26)
Your state, Arizona
quote:
"The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the State shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of men." (Article 2, Section 26)
My home state
quote:
"Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned." (Article 1, Section 16)
The 2nd Amendment
quote:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
To explain this so even someone as uneducated as you are can understand it.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State means that a state has the right to maintain a regulated militia for its own defense.
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. means that in order for the state to beable to maintain a well regulated militia, the people of the state have the individual right to keep and bear firearms, and that individual right shall not be infringed.
The NFA of 1934 is both illegal and unconstitutional because I can buy a Class III firearm in my state and still have to pay a tax on it, also I have to be checked out by the Federal government to be allowed to own such a firearm. Since the transaction of the purchasing of the firearms occurs within my state the Federal government, by the wording of the Constitution, has no say in the matter. Also, by my own state's constitution the state cannot question my reasons for owning or using such a firearm.
The 10th Amendment -
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.According to the 10th Amendment, the Federal government has only the authority granted to it in the Constitution, and any authority reserved for the States, such as regulating a militia, is prohibited to the Federal government.
Simply put, the right to regulate a militia is reserved for the States only, and the right to keep and bear firearms is reserved as an individual right of the people. Therefore the NFA of 1934 is an unconstitutional act by the Federal govenrment, as is every Federal law that concerns the sale of a firearm within a state.
If a firearm is manufactured in CT, and then sold to a dealer in NY the Federal government has the authority to regulate only the taxes on the firearm. If the firearm is manufactured in CT and sold to a dealer in CT, and then sold to a citizen of CT the Federal government has no authority to tax the firearm in any manner nor regulate the sale of the firearm in any way.
It is just that simple. The Federal government has no say in the keeping and bearing of firearms, and neither do most states. Any federal or state law that tries to regulate the sale of firearms is an infringement on the 2nd
Amendment, and the same as taking away the right to keep and bear firearms.
