Posted on 01/08/2018 6:28:34 AM PST by NobleFree
“What would you do? Would you take up arms against the government and advocate its overthrow?”
I would argue its unconstitutionality and urge people to disobey it, rather than roll over and urge its enforcement. You apparently would side with the BATF over the 2nd Amendment as long as the anti-RKBA law is in effect.
It is disingenuous to say Sessions is upholding a principle here since fedgov already selectively enforces much of the 10 gazillion laws on the books. He has singled out mj for special treatment at the expense of the 10th Amendment. We should defend, rather than trash both the 2nd and 10th.
Apparently you didn’t read that rogue judges keep slapping down punishing sanctuary cities by the DOJ He just tried again. A lot more MAGA would be happening (and a lot is anyway) were it not for commiepuke ahole judges.
It is not the fault of Sessions that more isn’t happening. As far as “secure the border”, that is not under the purview of the DoJ, and much has been happening.
It takes more than 1 year to dismantle and undo decades of disgustingly evil and pervasive corruption, crime and commiepuke agendas, and reverse course. Trump and his admin. have done amazingly well despite being surrounded by enemies.
MJ with its sky high THC content is not safer than alcohol, other than not damaging your liver.
Nonsense. I made it quite clear where I stand on the 2nd Amendment. The real question is what would be the reaction if the courts sided against the 2nd Amendment. How far are you willing to go personally to defend it?
It is disingenuous to say Sessions is upholding a principle here since fedgov already selectively enforces much of the 10 gazillion laws on the books.
A meaningless generality. Give me ten laws the feds don't enforce or selectively enforce.
He has singled out mj for special treatment at the expense of the 10th Amendment. We should defend, rather than trash both the 2nd and 10th.
Garbage. You can't have federal laws passed by Congress and signed by the President be ignored or contravened by the states. If certain states disagree with the existing laws, they should appeal thru the courts to determine their constitutionality.
“Nonsense. I made it quite clear where I stand on the 2nd Amendment.”
Actually, you didn’t say whether or not you supported enforcement of anti-Second Amendment laws. You support enforcement of mj laws that trample the Tenth Amendment, so it’s a fair question. Would you support enforcement of a federal anti-Second Amendment law passed by Congress and approved by SCOTUS, yes or no?
“The real question is what would be the reaction if the courts sided against the 2nd Amendment. How far are you willing to go personally to defend it?”
That’s an irrelevant question that has nothing to do with whether one should support or oppose enforcement of anti-constitutiona laws.
I support the Rule of Law. That is quite distinct from my own personal support of laws that I deem unconstitutional or unjust. I provided you with what I would do personally if Congress and SCOTUS were to pass laws that abridged our 2nd Amendment rights. It is the reason I am an NRA member.
I expect our law enforcement and elected officials to enforce the laws as written. The Mayor of San Francisco or the Governor of CA should not arbitrarily decide that they will not comply with federal immigration laws.
“The real question is what would be the reaction if the courts sided against the 2nd Amendment. How far are you willing to go personally to defend it?” That’s an irrelevant question that has nothing to do with whether one should support or oppose enforcement of anti-constitutiona laws.
First, who decides what is constitutional and what is not? You?
My question is very relevant. I have taken an oath several times in my life to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign and domestic. How far are you willing to go to defend the Constitution and the Rule of Law?
We have existing federal laws that apply to all residents of this country regardless of where they live. Until those laws are deemed unconstitutional by the courts or Congress, then I expect federal law enforcement officials to carry out the law as written. It is not the DOJ's or FBI's decision on what laws they will enforce and what they will not enforce. Nor should it matter who is involved. Equal treatment under the law is the foundation of our Republic.
The DOJ's Mission statement is quite clear:
To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans.
“How far are you willing to go to defend the Constitution and the Rule of Law?”
Irrelevant to what we were discussing. Besides, I already told you what I’d do. I would not comply and I would urge others not to. Beyond that, I don’t know. I could sit here and tell you I would become a poster boy for ‘From my cold dead hands’, but the fact is, no one knows how they’ll react to a threatening situation until actually faced with it.
You still have not not answered my specific question. Would you advocate enforcement of anti-2A laws by the feds - yes or no?
No. Why would I “advocate” enforcement of a law I am against? Hoverever, I would expect law enforcement to carry out their responsibility to enforce the law passed by Congress, signed by the President, and upheld by the courts.
“No. Why would I “advocate” enforcement of a law I am against? Hoverever, I would expect law enforcement to carry out their responsibility to enforce the law passed by Congress, signed by the President, and upheld by the courts.”
Sounds like you would defend the enforcement of an anti-2A law by gun-grabbers in govt.
LOL. We can only go around this tree so many times. I believe in the Rule of Law. I don’t want law enforcement and elected officials to decide which laws are acceptable and which ones should be ignored.
Agreed, I would make enforcing immigration law a higher priority. There are a lot more critical issues facing us than chasing a bunch of potheads.
Amen!
The plant was given to us by God Himself Genesis 1:29.
I don’t think the cannabis or the hemp plants are going anywhere.
Too many people have rejected prohibition at the voting booth for this genie to get shoved back into the bottle.
Hmmm...regardless of your position on MJ, invoking God as being on the side of cannabis use is hubris (one of the 7 deadly sins) on display.
“MJ with its sky high THC content is not safer than alcohol, other than not damaging your liver.”
Horsedung. High THC cannabis means you don’t have to use as much to achieve the desired effect. Saves me a fortune when I purchase my legal cannabis products here in Florida.
If you’d ever used today’s high THC cannabis you’d know it polices itself unmercifully. Use too much, you will fall asleep and/or experience paranoia & intense anxiety. Morons who chose to do so pay for it in the short run & potentially in the long run if they continue to abuse it.
As with most everything, too much isn’t good for ya.
Very well stated!
“Hmmm...regardless of your position on MJ, invoking God as being on the side of cannabis use is hubris (one of the 7 deadly sins) on display.”
Well, let’s use a small portion of the intellect God gave us, K? 1st off, I never presume to know the Mind of God so I don’t make declarations of what God is for & against. Sacred Scripture does that for us, would you not agree?
Cannabis is a seed baring plant. What does Genesis 1:29 say?
“God also said: See, I give you every seed-bearing plant on all the earth and every tree that has seed-bearing fruit on it to be your food;”
Pretty clear that God gave all seed baring plants to us. Cannabis is a seed baring plant that God Himself says He gave to us.
That’s it & that’s that :)
I don’t question the Bible and Gods word. I would question how some interpret it, without thoughtful prayer of and for His will.
Wasn’t saying anything about you personally. I have no idea of your stance on MJ, and wasn’t asking.
I was stating that IF you were implying that “God gave us Cannabis therefore its ok to indulge”, then I would have two responses. 1) God also gave us bubonic plague. 2) Jesus teaches us to be selfless, not selfish, and indulgences such as drugs for the sake of recreation are selfish indulgences, and arguably go against the ‘body is a temple’ concept.
That’s my interpretation of His word.
I am only a student of His word, so I should not preach any more. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.