Posted on 04/13/2013 7:56:50 AM PDT by JOHN W K
SEE: Collins,King vote to continue gun debate
WASHINGTON — Maine`s two U.S. senators voted with the majority Thursday to move forward with debate on a package of gun-control measures prompted by December's mass shooting at an elementary school in Connecticut.
I would love to hear Collins explain to her constituents in Maine, under what part of the federal Constitution have they delegated a power to the federal government to enter Main and regulate the ownership of firearms.
I do know Maine’s Declaration of Rights stipulates in crystal clear language that:
Section 16. To keep and bear arms. Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned.
I also know that the good people of the State of Maine ratified the first ten amendments to our federal constitution to specifically prevent misconstruction or abuse of Congress` powers. How do I know this to be true? Because the Resolution of the First Congress Submitting Twelve Amendments to the Constitution; March 4, 1789 declares this in crystal clear language:
THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added.
I also know the first ten amendments were added to our federal Constitution to preserve and protect federalism, our Constitution`s plan, so that the good people of Maine retain the sole, exclusive and inherent right of governing themselves and regulating the internal affairs of their own state. How do I know the preservation of federalism was specifically intended by our founding fathers? Because Madison states so with respect to the adoption of the first ten amendments to our federal Constitution. He says:
“It cannot be a secret to the gentlemen in this House, that, notwithstanding the ratification of this system of Government by eleven of the thirteen United States, in some cases unanimously, in others by large majorities; yet still there is a great number of our constituents who are dissatisfied with it; among whom are many respectable for their talents and patriotism, and respectable for the jealousy they have for their liberty, which, though mistaken in its object, is laudable in its motive. There is a great body of the people falling under this description, who at present feel much inclined to join their support to the cause of Federalism” ___See Madison, June 8th, 1789, Amendments to the Constitution
I also know that among the declaratory and restrictive clauses of the first ten amendments to our federal constitution one deals with firearms and another reserves to the States and the people therein all regulatory powers not granted to Congress. And so, it seems crystal clear from the historical record that the regulation of firearms was specifically removed from Congress’ legislative power by the 2nd Amendment, and intentionally reserved by the States and people therein under the Tenth Amendment. And so, is it not justified to ask Collins to explain to her constituents in Maine, under what part of the federal Constitution have they removed the protection of federalism and delegated a power to the federal government to enter Maine and regulate the ownership of firearms?
JWK
"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides, that such protection [federalism] was afforded, would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story
they are ignroign the national constitution- soemthign liek a ‘lesser’ state constitution isn’t goign to stop them in their tracks-
We have a government that is out of control because htey know the msm will NEVER call them to the carpet for their anti-Americanism
Recall.
Spell check.
April 12, 2013
I cherish the Second Amendment, just as I cherish all of the rights enshrined in the Constitution.
But how can that be Senator Susan Collins when you have ignored Maine's Tenth Amendment Right to federalism as documented in the FIRST POST IN THE THREAD and you propose to have Congress debate how it may enter the State of Maine to regulate the ownership of firearms?
JWK
If the America People do not rise up and defend their Constitutions, federal and State, and the intentions and beliefs under which they were adopted, who is left to do so but the very people who these constitutions were designed to control and regulate?
“But how can that be Senator Susan Collins when you have ignored Maine’s Tenth Amendment Right to federalism as documented in the FIRST POST IN THE THREAD and you propose to have Congress debate how it may enter the State of Maine to regulate the ownership of firearms?”
Through the use of the ubiquitous “Commerce Clause”. Their actions are for the well-being of the children of the village of course.
I am not making light of your remarks so do not take offense. I am in complete agreement with the points you have presented and you have presented them well. However, our representatives in the halls of Congress represent the mob, (an ochlocracy due to undue influence) their personal interests and agendas. A reading of Amendment II and the complete knowledge of how and why the amendmant was included, coupled with the recognition by the representative of their responsibility to uphold, rather than encroach upon, the amendment, would have resulted in the realization the representative was proscribed from entering into any debate that would effectively limit in any way the exercise of that right by citizens. By doing so, they, our alledged representatives, are continuing to not only violate their oath of office but also advocating the abrogation of the contract between “The People” and their government by ignoring the process through which changes to the Constitution are initiated, approved of and ratified by the states.
It is far easier for them to debate the method by which to achieve the exercise of control, approve of and codify laws, prosecute and convict citizens for the ownership or possession of restricted inanimate objects, rather than prosecute for bad behavior in the use of the object, thereby denying said possession of those objects in the future by creating a record of conviction contained in a database maintained by the state, effectively accomplishing the desire of achieving control over the citizenry.
This ongoing process will not end well.
My head hurts.
Disclaimer: I affirm I am a common layman and my comments are not based in the study of law, but in a study of Common Sense. I have also slept at a Holiday Inn on occassion while enroute from point to point in my travels.
Through the use of the ubiquitous “Commerce Clause”. Their actions are for the well-being of the children of the village of course.
chulaivn66,
I wonder how that can be when our founders added a number of declaratory and restrictive clauses to our Constitution [its first ten amendments] to specifically prevent misconstruction or abuse of powers granted to Congress ___ one declaratory clause dealing with firearms, and another reserving to the States and the people therein all regulatory powers not granted to Congress. Seems crystal clear from the historical record that the regulation of firearms was specifically removed from Congress’ power over commerce by the 2nd Amendment, and intentionally reserved by the States and people therein under the Tenth Amendment. And this was done to preserve and protect federalism, our Constitution’s plan.
JWK
If the America People do not rise up and defend their federal Constitution and the intentions and beliefs under which it was adopted, who is left to do so but the very people who it was designed to control and regulate?
They are abrogating the contract, the Constitution, between the people and their government by usurping authority not granted to them and amending whatever they choose in violation of their oath of office to achieve the goals desirous of the mob. They are succumbing to the power of influence. They are violating the law of the land and doing so as you clearly and effectively point out in your statements and referrences.
You, I and all about us are witnessing the collapse of the Republic. This is how it happens and our vociferous protestations and debates of the fine points will not affect the outcome. Recalling a statement made regarding the need for the frequency of rebellion and the loss of the blood of tyrants and patriots in the process, I find we are long overdue for remedial action. I am a peaceable man not easily provoked and react only in defense of life, liberty and property. It may well be the acts of those holding high positions in government will provide the catalyst for rebellion and an opportunity for redress. I fear I may live long enough to witness the catastrophe resulting from that opportunity.
In closing I add that, in my experience, barring a realization of wrong doing and self imposed correction of behavior, the only way to stop a bully is through a judicious use of force in self-defense. In other words, “Just say no.” and the chips will fall where they may.
There is no right to vote in the original Constitution, and no amendment passed so far (including the Poll Tax Amendment)would prohibit a state from disenfranchising anyone based on their receiving welfare or Public Assistance.
Pass a law and require everyone to re-register, then deny all the welfare cases, unemployed, food stampers, the whole lot.
Collapse is inevitable if the current electorate is allowed to continue to vote for marxists.
This is the only solution.
You can't educate parasites, and the Founders had no intention of enfranchising all and instituting Universal Suffrage, which is the reason we are where we are today.
Giving everyone a right to vote creates a Democracy, and a political class which will pander to the parasites in exchange for power.
The Founders were brilliant men who understood history and the mistakes made by previous civilizations, mistakes which led to their demise.
I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. … Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never. John Adams, letter to John Taylor (15 April 1814).
Democracy will prevail when men believe the vote of Judas as good as that of Jesus Christ.
Attributed to Thomas Carlyle "The Scholar in a Republic", centennial anniversary address to Phi Beta Kappa of Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts (June 30, 1881). Reported in Carlos Martyn and Wendell Phillips, The Agitator (1890), p. 581. Reported as unverified in Respectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations (1989).
Nitpicky, I know, but there was no Maine when the BOR was ratified.
None of the things you mention will be done. Hence the inevitable collapse. As I said, our protestations are and will continue to be ineffectual. Follow the money, influence and the resulting inflation of egos and you will see I am right. There’s no gratification possible in maintaining the ship of state, handing it off for guidance to their successors based upon a preplotted course, that compares to what I have mentioned above for those who are weak of will and lacking in moral values, knowledge and commitment to perform their duty and avoid self-aggrandizement. In short they are corrupt.
For a very long time that which the founders were aware of feared and attempted to guard against has been at work to undermine the ideals proclaimed and codified in the Constitution. Changes which have occurred from the manufacture from whole cloth will necessarily fall away as a result of the collapse and subsequent reorganization. The best we may hope for is our chosen representatives to affect restoration will have read the writings of the founders to acquire their understanding of mankind and that government which serves the interests of man in the best manner. Even then because of the frail nature of man it will eventually suffer the same fate. Bloodshed and rebirth repeated endlessly until the end of time.
Good luck.
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.