Zero-Tolerance Gone Too Far

Liberty Belles ^ | March 9, 2004 | .Jennifer Freeman

[Don Joe]

Well, I think I've made my point.

G'nite.

[philetus]

Sure, the 2nd says he should, but the law says he shouldn't.

If he did it delibertly, I applaud him for his courage.

If he forgot he had a SHOtGUN in his truck, he's a dumba$$.

[Ken H]

I agree I was being somewhat hypocritical. I should rather say I PERSONALLY think the law in unconstitutional . But I have no doubt the federal courts will allow it never the less. Should someone disobey a law they think is unconstitutional ? well call me a coward but when your married with 2 kids sometimes you grudgingly toe big brother's line.

Whether or not you should disobey an unconstitutional law is not what we've been discussing.

The issue is your contemptuous attitude toward a citizen who is facing criminal charges for violating a law you believe is unconstitutional.

[Ken H]

Sure, the 2nd says he should, but the law says he shouldn't.

Agreed. The point I'm trying to get across to the poster is that the Second Amendment is supposed to be the Supreme Law.

His contempt should be for the unconstitutional GFSA, not for a citizen exercising the RBKA.

If he did it delibertly, I applaud him for his courage.

If he forgot he had a SHOtGUN in his truck, he's a dumba$$.

Possibly so, but the focus belongs on the Second Amendment violation and Commerce Clause abuse, IMO.

[philetus]

"the focus belongs on the Second Amendment violation and Commerce Clause abuse"

I'm inclined to agree with you there since, If the second had not been hijacked, there would be no crime.

[sauropod]

LOL! Better not do that now! Nancy Grasmick would personally throw you in jail and lose the key!

[Mulder]

Great job on this thread! I've enjoyed reading your responses to the bootlicker.

[Vic3O3]

ping

[Smokin' Joe]

When I was in the third grade, you could still order a shotgun from Herters by filling out the form in the catalog and signing your check. It (the shotgun) would come in the mail.

We have been trying to stop sliding down the slippery slope since Barry Goldwater lost the presidential election.

[Smokin' Joe]

Just a thought. It dawns on me that everyone (almost) picks up the definition from the USC for "militia", even though the Second Amendment antedates the USC and the adoption of the Constitution.

Perhaps it is in this that the original meaning of the amendment is being lost.

Contemporary dictionary definitions of "Militia" (simply: "the Army") and "regulated" (in a word: "Controlled"), when substituted, yield the basis of the amendment. To wit: A well-controlled Army being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

The idea being that the overwhelming numbers of armed citizens, even in the absence of martial training, could keep the Army in check should it no longer be subservient to the Civil power.

The discussion is to be found in the Federalist Papers, where the question of a standing army, and its size (if any)is dealt with.

Unfortunately, relying on a later definition of militia opens the door to the entire militia v.s. National Guard v.s. population in general argument and obfusticates the notion of the RKBA.

Note also that the word 'State' has undergone radical transformation from the pre-ratification era (one of my ancestors swore an oath to the Soverign State of Maryland, prior to the Articles of Confederation)to the post-Civil War era, when 'States' had become mere political subdivisions, and not soverign nations united for the purpose of a common defense, and to promote the general welfare....

[Dan from Michigan]

The problem nowadays is that nobody knows what DISCRETION is anymore.

Zerotolerance is the epidomy of the law of unintended consequences. You get hysteria by a few sucker moms scared of gang bangers and you get a law of zero tolerance.

And oftentimes people like Adam are the ones caught.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Me, I would've just told Adam to take the firearm home and not bring it back...

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

My name, of course, refers to the "tolerance" displayed by the banning of Santa Claus in Kensington, as opposed to the common-sense tolerance of minor, unintended infractions.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Actually, if I remember correctly, the "commerce" version of the law was thrown out by the Supreme Court as well, but some Clintonites simply tacked it on another bill as an amendment, so here we are...

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Relax. Newbies are exposed all the time. You're no different.

[breakem]

you're taking this way too seriously