I don’t see in the BOR where gays have a “right” to having a cake baked, but I do see the “right to keep and bear arms”.
Another dem trying to write his own Constitution.
Please consider the following about the 2nd Amendment.
Like everyone else, I grew up with the 2nd Amendment. After all, it is one of the rights in the Bill of Rights. But when you consider that the federal government has only those powers that the states expressly constitutionally delegate to it, then you become aware of something that is glaringly missing from Constitution with respect to federal gun laws imo.
More specifically, even though the Founding States gave Congress the specific powers to make gun laws, evidenced by the military-related clauses in Congress’s constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers, Clauses 12 and 16 as examples, there are no express delegations concerning civilian-related arms.
The absence of constitutionally enumerated federal powers concerning civilian-related arms is significant (imo) because a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting Supreme Court justices had clarified that powers that the states haven’t expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
And since there are no express constitutional delegations of power for the feds to regulate civilian-related firearms, the 2nd Amendment arguably becomes a safety net on civilian gun rights imo. Insights welcome.
In fact, it is disturbing that federal gun regulations for non-military related arms seem to have started appearing in the books during FDR Administration, FDR and the Congress at that time infamous for making laws which they had no express constitutional authority to make.
Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control
As a side note to this discussion, as mentioned elsewhere on Free Republic, President Trump and USAG Sessions need to decide the fate of people who are in prison for breaking federal laws that the states have never expressly constitutionally authorized the feds to make, such federal laws based on stolen state powers.
Drain the swamp! Drain the swamp!
Remember in November ’18 !
Since Trump entered the ’16 presidential race too late for patriots to make sure that there were state sovereignty-respecting candidates on the primary ballots, patriots need make sure that such candidates are on the ’18 primary ballots so that they can be elected to support Trump in draining the unconstitutionally big federal government swamp.
Such a Congress will also be able to finish draining the swamp with respect to getting the remaining state sovereignty-ignoring, activist Supreme Court justices off of the bench.
In fact, if Justice Gorsuch turns out to be a liberal Trojan Horse then we will need 67 patriot senators to remove a House-impeached Gorsuch from office.
Noting that the primaries start in Iowa and New Hampshire in February ‘18, patriots need to challenge candidates for federal office in the following way.
While I Googled the primary information above concerning Iowa and New Hampshire, FReeper iowamark brought to my attention that the February primaries for these states apply only to presidential election years. And after doing some more scratching, since primary dates for most states for 2018 elections probably haven’t been uploaded at this time (March 14, 2017), FReepers will need to find out primary dates from sources and / or websites in their own states.
Patriots need to qualify candidates by asking them why the Founding States made the Constitution’s Section 8 of Article I; to limit (cripple) the federal government’s powers.
Patriots also need to find candidates that are knowledgeable of the Supreme Court's clarifications of the federal government’s limited powers listed below.
“Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States.” —Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphasis added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.