Safeguarding Constitutional Rights in Texas

Coach is Right ^ | 10/18/15 | Trayce Bradford

[Oldpuppymax]

The Founding Fathers believed that the United States of America and her individual states should never be subservient to any foreign power or legal system and that no foreign legal system or foreign policy should be allowed to encroach upon our rights protected by the federal or state Constitutions.

In passing Texas Laws for Texas Courts (TLTC, known nationally as American Law for American Courts or ALAC), we are preserving the individual rights of all citizens and liberties and freedoms protected by the Constitution of the State of Texas.

Furthermore, TLTC prevents encroachment by any foreign law/policy or transnationalism that would impact Texas citizens when they enter a Texas courtroom. For example, the outcome of a family legal proceeding related to marriage, divorce or parent-child relationships (collectively comprising 90% of all foreign law cases in this nation and in Texas) would be compromised by allowing foreign law or transnational policies. In virtually every case that foreign law is applied, it is to the detriment of women and children. TLTC would guarantee against the misapplied use of comity of foreign judgments, choice of law clauses, choice of foreign forum clauses and explicitly prevent targeting those by other races and religions, etc., to protect their constitutional rights.

Texas, like all states and our nation as a whole, has a process that has given us the rules and policies by which we govern and live our lives. The three branches of government: executive, legislative and judicial are to be a balance of authority and guidance to benefit the citizenry. This system is to provide safeguards to the balance of power and to prevent overreaching and/or judicial activism.

Our state legislative body has a vital role to play in preserving constitutional rights...

[Texas Eagle]

I love you Coach, but they are not CONSTITUTIONAL Rights. They are GOD-GIVEN rights.

If they were simply Constitutional Rights, they would alienable. Meaning take-away-able.

Sorry to split hairs, but we have got to take back our language.

Other than that, a typically great essay.

[philman_36]

Sec. 23. RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. Every citizen shall have the right to keep and bear arms in the lawful defense of himself or the State; but the Legislature shall have power, by law, to regulate the wearing of arms, with a view to prevent crime.

Then the first thing that should happen is open carry and recognition of what "arms" are...

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American.... [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." (Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.)

You want to prevent crime? Then let us openly carry pistols, swords and knives longer than our friggin' fingers!

[philman_36]

[WildHighlander57]

In Texas, open carry of pistols & revolvers will be allowed come January.

Some areas will limit it, but generally, open carry will be OK.

[philman_36]

In Texas, open carry of pistols & revolvers will be allowed come January.

But not swords, knives and/or maces. They are arms just like pistols and revolvers.

I would actually like to carry my flanged mace openly. It will break bones (mainly), not kill, unless I deliver a head shot.
I'm far more likely to kill with a pistol if accosted (center mass is natural reaction) which is not what I desire while defending myself.