[Jeff Head]

... so, then by your definition, the State could change its constitution and bar freedom of speech, tell people they had to attend a certain church or that they couldn't attend a specific church ... or that all of your property belinged to the state and it could confiscate it at will ... or that there would no longer be trials in that state but that a commission appointed by the governor ... who by the way would no longer be elected ... would pass judgement on all citizens?

I don't think so.

In the end ... it comes don to one question. Will the people suffer it? If they will not, then they must be armed to effectively press that point. Our founders understood this ... tyrants understand this ... we'd best not forget it.

[Viva Le Dissention]

Uh, Jeff, no. The Supreme Court has incorporated the 1st Amendment as applying to the states. It is a right "fundamental to a well-ordered liberty." States can't infringe upon it.

The 2nd Amendment, however, is an entirely different story. Just for fun, I looked up the CA constitution: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_1

No provision for the right to bear arms.

By the way, Jeff--check out Barron v. Baltimore. Maryland seized private property without compensating the owner. The Supreme Court upheld it, saying the Constitution didn't apply to the states. That case has since been overruled, as that provision of the Bill of Rights now applies, but not for the 2nd Amendment.

[Squantos]

Article IV
Section. 2.
Clause 1: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States

Artical VI
....Clause 2:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding

Would these parts of the constitution not preclude individual socialist polidiots practicing sedition from such interpetation of individual state laws ? I ask as I do not know for sure.

Stay Safe Ya'll

[sweetliberty]

"Will the people suffer it? If they will not, then they must be armed to effectively press that point. Our founders understood this ... tyrants understand this ... we'd best not forget it."

What it comes down to is who WILL pick up arms against the first "law enforcement officials" who try to enforce "laws" which violate our rights, and especially the right to bear arms against those who would be the agents of enforcement of this kind of tyranny. I can't wondering if our will to act will match our words of complaint.