Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: robertpaulsen
"No matter what laws are passed by any state, if there is a conflict, the laws written and protections granted under this constitution are supreme."

Must be cognitive dissonance on your part. There is a clear conflict between gun bans, State and Federal, and an ennumerated Right to own firearms.

Refuted with your own words. Not the first time I've seen that happen on FR. Unfortunately, I know from experience that you will just jam your fingers in your ears a little bit deeper.

172 posted on 12/03/2003 9:58:41 AM PST by Dead Corpse (For an Evil Super Genius, you aren't too bright are you?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies ]


To: Dead Corpse
"There is a clear conflict between gun bans, State and Federal,"

Only in your mind.

The second amendment says that the RKBA shall not be infinged by the federal government. They may be (and are) infringed by the states. Some states allow CCW, some don't. Illinois requires a Firearm Owners' ID card to purchase a gun or even to purchase ammunition. Other states don't. Some cities (acting under state constitutions) even ban the ownership of guns.

So, in the real world, it all makes sense and there is no conflict, clear or otherwise.

But, your fantasy world has no explanation for this. A conflict arises in your fantasy world. Your only explanation is, "The states and cities are acting unconstitutionally!", whatever that means. You can't point to one ruling, one case, one finding, that supports your claim. You just "feel like" it's unconstitutional.

Well, la-di-dah.

178 posted on 12/03/2003 10:10:20 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson