Also realize that there is way to change unemployment from 9.6% to 5% overnight. But with incentives to businesses over a period of 6 to 12 months there could be significant change. That is what Boehner and others in GOP should be focusing on.
Birther issue is not going anywhere. SCOTUS has rejected to review it many times already. I am sure you are aware of the definition of insanity. It is repeating the same thing over and over expecting a different result.
And I speak as the most anti-Obama voter out there. B ut I am not insane.
insanity –noun, plural -ties.
1. — the condition of being insane; a derangement of the mind.
2. — Law . such unsoundness of mind as affects legal responsibility or capacity.
3. — Psychiatry . (formerly) psychosis.
4. — extreme folly; senselessness; foolhardiness.
Sane
1 — proceeding from a sound mind : rational
2 — mentally sound; especially : able to anticipate and appraise the effect of one’s actions
3 — healthy in body
Let’s just assume you’re talking about definition #2 of Sane when you cite insanity as being “repeating the same thing over and over expecting a different result.”
I have a bit of a legal problem which, upon asking anyone in a position of authority, is always ignored or referred to someone else; should I give up on it then?
Anyway, here it is.
New Mexico State Statute
NMSA 30-7-2.4. Unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises; notice; penalty.
A. Unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises consists of carrying a firearm on university premises except by:
—(1) a peace officer;
—(2) university security personnel;
—(3) a student, instructor or other university-authorized personnel who are engaged in army, navy, marine corps or air force reserve officer training corps programs or a state-authorized hunter safety training program;
—(4) a person conducting or participating in a university-approved program, class or other activity involving the carrying of a firearm; or
—(5) a person older than nineteen years of age on university premises in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance, for lawful protection of the person’s or another’s person or property.
B. A university shall conspicuously post notices on university premises that state that it is unlawful to carry a firearm on university premises.
C. As used in this section:
—(1) “university” means a baccalaureate degree-granting post-secondary educational institution, a community college, a branch community college, a technical-vocational institute and an area vocational school; and
—(2) “university premises” means:
——(a) the buildings and grounds of a university, including playing fields and parking areas of a university, in or on which university or university-related activities are conducted; or
——(b) any other public buildings or grounds, including playing fields and parking areas that are not university property, in or on which university-related and sanctioned activities are performed.
D. Whoever commits unlawful carrying of a firearm on university premises is guilty of a petty misdemeanor.
HOWEVER, according to the New Mexico State Constitution:
Art II, Sec. 6. [Right to bear arms.]
No law shall abridge the right of the citizen
to keep and bear arms for security and
defense, for lawful hunting and recreational
use and for other lawful purposes, but nothing
herein shall be held to permit the carrying
of concealed weapons. No municipality
or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident
of the right to keep and bear arms.
So, given the above, if I were to strap on my .45 and walk around my University campus would I be breaking any law? [why or why not?]
According to the State Constitution “No law shall abridge the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense,” yet NMSA 30-7-2.4 certainly does. {In fact, if you live in on-campus student housing by the NMSA 30-7-2.4 you may neither keep nor bear arms... unless, perhaps, you always left it in your vehicle... but that assumes you have a vehicle.}
Would the police, acting in accordance with NMSA 30-7-2.4, making an arrest be making a legitimate arrest? Why or why not?
If they ARE [making an legitimate arrest] then doesn’t it stand to reason that ANY statute, regardless of its agreement with the state constitution, may then be acted upon? Should I try to take this to court? {I’m sure many gun-control laws have case-law support, thus fighting this law may fall under the “repeating the same thing over and over expecting a different result” definition of insanity you gave, no?}
But let’s take this one step further; the state constitution says “no municipality or county shall regulate, in any way, an incident of the right to keep and bear arms” so then, by what authority do the city- & county-courthouses display “No Weapons” on their buildings?