Replies

Congressman Billybob:

It is up to every state to determine its own criminal law.

But said criminal laws must comply with our BORs individual protections.

So if North Carolina, New York, and Nevada reach different decisions on the subject, that is permitted by the US Constitution.

Simply not true according to the plain words of the 14th.

I know that answer will displease some people, perhaps even both of you. But I always start any discussion of political basics with the plain language -- or lack of language -- of the Constitution on that subject. John / Billybob 1,605

The USSC let stand a peculiar 'criminal law' about assault weapons in CA last week, Billy. -- Do you support CA's 'right' to prohibit such weapons?

______________________________________

Spiff wrote:
The 14th Amendment has been misinterpreted. This misinterpretation flies in the face of the original intent of the Founding Fathers and is the root cause of the FedGov's involvement in just about every aspect of our lives. You want to stuff the unfettered government genie back in its bottle? Amend or repeal the 14th.

___________________________________

Spiff wrote: The 14th Amendment has been misinterpreted.

How so? Its language is clear. States cannot infringe on our individual libertes.

This misinterpretation flies in the face of the original intent of the Founding Fathers and is the root cause of the FedGov's involvement in just about every aspect of our lives. You want to stuff the unfettered government genie back in its bottle? Amend or repeal the 14th.

The USSC let stand a peculiar 'criminal law' about assault weapons in CA last week, Spiff. -- Do you support CA's 'right' to prohibit such weapons?

Do you support CA's 'right' to prohibit such weapons?

I do no support the infringement of an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether that infringement is committed by the FedGov or the state of California. However, as long as California has a Republican form of government and the California constitution permits it, and barring the traditional misinterpretation of the 14th, the California state legislature can prohibit weapons and the U.S. Constitution allows it and the 10th Amendment affirms this fact. The BOR clearly placed its limits upon the FedGov (as in, "Congress shall make no law...) as the Constitution was defining the FedGov, the several States pre-existing. Until the 14th began to be misinterpreted we had a federal form of government. Since then it has almost entirely metamorphed into a national government. Sad.

The issue of gun ownership is in a different category than general criminal law. The later was left to the states by the Constitution. The former, however, has a specific Amendment, the 2nd, put in the Bill of Rights to protect it.

The Supreme Court has never properly recognized or honestly enforced the 2nd Amendment, but it is still there. And in line with my general views on constitutional subjects, when the Constitution has spoken it is the business of all Americans -- including the Justices on the Supreme Court -- to enforce it. If they cannot do that, then it is their business to resign from the Court.

I hope that answers your question.

John / Billybob