Posted on 06/11/2021 6:23:59 PM PDT by Libloather
So federal laws prohibiting firearms in federal courthouses or federal prisons won't be enforced by the state?
Take out the gun violence in the three largest cities and MO is tranquil.
People in St. Louis?
In “urban” St. Louis...
States Rights!
Push Back on
“The Man!”
“Rise Up and
Cast Off the
Shackles of an
Oppressive Society!”
...
Author Unknown
notice the state senator is from Battlefield. City is named after the Battle Of Wilson Creek ill save you the time, but it is a huge battle for us in Missouri in the Civil War, that some are still fighting.
““... a state with such high rates of gun violence.”
No Missouri does not have a high rate of gun violence. It may have a high rate of human violence with people who use guns. What kind of people might that be?”
****
The KC Red Star is a commie drooling rag for the past 40 years. If ANY article shows up on MSN’s news aggregator, you know it’s like watching CNN..pure crap.
Interstate commerce clause. Nullification was ruled on in the days of Andrew Jackson. Dumb. He wants to virtue signal, let him pardon that couple from St. Louis that were prosecuted just for brandishing guns at a BLM mob threatening them.
He can’t pardon them until they are convicted.
He’s running for senate in MO
https://www.iheart.com/podcast/139-the-michael-berry-show-27764850/episode/mark-mccloskey-83521315/
Incorrect!
People transporting their own personal goods across State lines is not interstate commerce.
People doing things which are not interstate commerce are not covered at all, that includes local economic activity as there is no enumerated power given Congress to regulate intrastate commerce or things which may affect intrastate commerce but are not actual interstate commerce themselves.
There is no enumerated power given Congress to say what Arms the citizens may possess, nor indeed any enumerated power to forbid them to acquire, maintain possession of or dispose of personal or real property of any sort.
The 10th Amendment then expressly forbids the exercise of all powers not expressly delegated, noting that those are reserved (belong to) to others besides the federal, the States or the people.
Progressivism is theft of powers, transitioning the federal from a government established by the people through enumeration of powers to one where the government is lawlessly self establishing, grabbing powers and authority it has no right to these belonging to others.
Nullification, moreover, was not tried to be used in the 18th century against the unlawful exercises of powers where Congress etc had no delegated power to do something but in order to try to nullify statutes for which there was actual enumerated power, notably laws concerning the disposition of escaped slaves when later found. Those efforts were not nullification in a constitutional sense but only in the sense that they didn’t want to obey laws and they called it nullification.
Nullification of statutes which are themselves lawless for not being pursuant to the Constitution is entirely proper.
The federal is a largely unlawful entity, a thief of powers to govern and a thief treasure in order to sustain that lawlessness..
You should hear about some of those Missouri battles between Mormons and those who had been offended by them.
The LDS are STILL whining!
Re commerce clause and local small businesses, see Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964)
“The federal is a largely unlawful entity, a thief of powers to govern and a thief treasure in order to sustain that lawlessness..”
You may be right, but tell that to SCOTUS, and they’ll stare you right in your decisis.
The Court has been behaving lawlessly since they decided to claim people have no standing to pursue a private prosecution of a public right.
A corrupt institution that is accursed.
Have to go back about 90 years to even begin to get a handle on substantive due process and other out-of-control lines of precedent.
Worst of all was the dismissal of the Texas case on grounds of standing, and Justice Brave-Sir-Robert’s law clerk publicly stating in disgust that he didn’t want to follow the Bush case’s ruling because “there is rioting in the street”. If SCOTUS can be buffaloed by a bunch of thuggish louts from following its own precedents, nothing is safe or sacred anymore.
But the law makes enforcing the federal law against gun ownership by those convicted of domestic violence illegal. But on the other hand, since permitless concealed carry was passed in 2016 that law has been pretty much moot to begin with.
Burn it all, every ruling abrogating the Constitution, dig up the lawless Justices’ corpses and throw them into cesspools.
Another reason why rioter and looters should be shot by the ordinary citizens whose lives, persons or property they threaten.
Yes, property, shoot them for threatening property.
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.