Replies

Joshua poses a good point ... "an unconstitutional law is no law"

I mulled that over a bit and wondered; Is that true?

The most famous case in Constitutional law is "Marbury v. Madison." In it, John Marshall the first chief justice of the Supreme Court said just that - a law which violates the Constitution is not valid. It is the precedent which establishes the review power of the Supreme Court, and they would absolutely agree with this.

However, the second part of the precedent in Marbury v. Madison is that the Supreme Court - alone, with no higher review - gets to decide. That part is wrong because ultimately 'We, the People' have the authority, but it's what the federal government follows. Which means that if they do pass an "assault weapons" ban, and the Supreme Court says it is okay (however wrongly) then they can still send the federal marshalls - with guns - to get our guns. Being right on the literal reading of the Constitution does not stop a bullet. Might makes right, and unless 'We, the People' demonstrate our might then others will declare themselves to be right.

On the additional part of your comment - that even though you are a convicted felon you should be able to keep a fiream because you are an American - I'm not sure the Constitution supports your position.

The right of 'the people' to keep and bear arms applies to 'the people.' As used in the Constitution, this is the same as "We, the People" and includes all those who agree to be bound by the Constitution. Those - like felons - who have demonstrated that they do not feel the need to be bound by the law, have removed themselves from the 'body politic' who comprise 'the people.'

Saying that one is willing to abide by *some* of the Constiutionally valid laws but not all of them is the same as saying that one is not bound by the laws - because that person is deciding for himself/herself what they will do, not accepting the decision of 'the people.'

The problem is that there is no provision for demontrated an enduring repentance as a way to re-enter, 'the people.' So, while being 'an American' is not enough, there should be a way for someone to regain their status as one of 'the People.' I'm sympathetic to your situation, even though the issue is not the gun control act of 1968, but the basic body of law addressing the status of convicted felons.

Those - like felons - who have demonstrated that they do not feel the need to be bound by the law, have removed themselves from the 'body politic' who comprise 'the people.'

That is why felons serve time, or are put to death. Once that time is paid (to include all probation and/or parole), one should receive all rights back. If you are concerned a violent felon is able to have a gun once all time is served, then maybe we shouldn't look at the restriction of guns, but the length of incarceration for the crime. If said violent felon can't be trusted with a firearm, then why is said violent felon not still behind bars. Not only that, but there are too many ways to become a felon today.