Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: neverdem
we recognize that today’s debates are similar to those of 1787: Should we have a federal government that is overreaching and infringes on individual liberties or should the individual be protected and the federal government be limited?

The Bill of Rights (first 10) limit the federal (general) government and do not apply to the states or individuals.

The bolded portion points to the fact that this is what we have today as a result of the 'many' states' abdicating their responsibility. Roe v. Wade and the Texas homosexual privacy decisions are but a couple of examples of the overreaching, illegitimate malignancy that today festers at the federal level.

Any and every 'infringment' on gun owners by the feds is an expressed violation of the 2nd ammendment.

Any state infringements are not disallowed. Example: if you live in the state of Chickensh*t, the legislators there could infringe to the extent of banning all guns. The trick for them is to get re-elected to the legislature in the state of Chickensh*t. If the majority voting population of the state are truly chickensh*t, you're out of luck.

However, a neighboring state, the state of MeanSonsofB*tches has no ban on guns, carry, or anything whatsoever. And lo and behold, they have less crime. Soon the folks from the state of Chickensh*t tire of all the rapes, robberies, carjackings, and home invasions, etc. and look to their neighboring state- MSB- for solutions. (Remember, the feds were taken out of the equation by the 2nd Ammendment, and that's rock solid)

What happens next is what the founders had in mind initially: little democracies experimenting in the wilderness and, over time, finding the truth and implementing it.

What they (founders) feared most is what we have today. Which leads me to a dire prediction: Unless we return to the original vision that was the basis of this country's founding, we'll bear witness to it's demise, perhaps in our lifetimes. It's in the cards as much as it's been spelled out in the Declaration of Independence.

As much as I love this country, it is my greatest hope that the federal misapplication of powers may be brought to an end and that we may once again enjoy the 'plan' that was slated for us by some very wise and long dead white guys. Absent that, we will surely be living in interesting times.

87 posted on 06/02/2004 5:32:57 PM PDT by budwiesest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: budwiesest

Hey, your computer is screwed up, you posted twice!


88 posted on 06/02/2004 5:49:30 PM PDT by budwiesest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

To: budwiesest
we recognize that today's debates are similar to those of 1787:
Should we have a federal government that is overreaching and infringes on individual liberties or should the individual be protected and the federal government be limited?

The Bill of Rights (first 10) limit the federal (general) government and do not apply to the states or individuals.

Daft reasoning. See the supremacy clause, Art VI.

The bolded portion points to the fact that this is what we have today as a result of the 'many' states' abdicating their responsibility. Roe v. Wade and the Texas homosexual privacy decisions are but a couple of examples of the overreaching, illegitimate malignancy that today festers at the federal level.

Both decisions were triggered by state 'laws' that infringed upon our right to live private lives.

Any and every 'infringment' on gun owners by the feds is an expressed violation of the 2nd ammendment.

As are any state 'laws' that so infringe. Our Constitutional law is supreme in the USA.

Any state infringements are not disallowed.

Infringements by states are among the prohibited powers mentioned in the 10th Amendment.

Example: if you live in the state of Chickensh*t, the legislators there could infringe to the extent of banning all guns. The trick for them is to get re-elected to the legislature in the state of Chickensh*t. If the majority voting population of the state are truly chickensh*t, you're out of luck. However, a neighboring state, the state of MeanSonsofB*tches has no ban on guns, carry, or anything whatsoever. And lo and behold, they have less crime. Soon the folks from the state of Chickensh*t tire of all the rapes, robberies, carjackings, and home invasions, etc. and look to their neighboring state- MSB- for solutions. (Remember, the feds were taken out of the equation by the 2nd Ammendment, and that's rock solid) What happens next is what the founders had in mind initially: little democracies experimenting in the wilderness and, over time, finding the truth and implementing it.

NO, what happens "next" is happening in Calif, where millions of people are being oppressed by a majority of their socialistic peers, who are convinced that owning an evil looking assault weapon is morally wrong.

What they (founders) feared most is what we have today.

Exactly, we have a coalition of socialistic 'moral' majorities governing this country. Rinocrats rule.

Which leads me to a dire prediction: Unless we return to the original vision that was the basis of this country's founding, we'll bear witness to it's demise, perhaps in our lifetimes. It's in the cards as much as it's been spelled out in the Declaration of Independence. As much as I love this country, it is my greatest hope that the federal [AND STATE] misapplication of powers may be brought to an end and that we may once again enjoy the 'plan' that was slated for us by some very wise and long dead white guys. Absent that, we will surely be living in interesting times.

You got the last part right.

89 posted on 06/02/2004 6:08:07 PM PDT by tpaine ("The line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being." -- Solzhenitsyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

To: budwiesest
100% correct. One thing to note, and it reinforces your point that the second amendment only applies to the federal government.

The Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Federal AWB of 1994 were passed under the Commerce Clause, not the second amendment. Only in this manner would the laws apply to the states, rather than simply federal property.

115 posted on 06/03/2004 8:12:43 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson