Kindly explain what sources you have used to develop your absurd conclusions about the Constitution. Did you rely on one of the tin-foil sites or writers? Or is your confusion entirely home-grown? Either way, you have retired the crown as the Freeper with the most nonsensical ideas about the Constitution.
John / Billybob
" -- The first words of the First Amendment are, "CONGRESS shall make no law ...." It is crystal clear that the Bill of Rights was written to restrain the power and reach of the federal government only. -- "
Which implies that our State or local governments have the ability to ignore the amendments "just ratified".
-- Could you please clarify this issue?
Again you spread intellectual confusion like a literary squid in the constitutional seas.
Colorful, Bbob, but you are the one confused, not I.
State legislators have a federally-assigned role in ratifying amendments, as they choose. Why you equate "ratifying amendments" with "ignoring the Constitution" is beyond me.
Why? - Because it is your position that State/local governments can ignore our BOR's. -- You agree that CA can prohibit assault weapons, for one such instance, incredibly enough. -- Why is that?
Kindly explain what sources you have used to develop your conclusions about the Constitution.
My 'sources' are the plain words of our Constitution itself. You should study it without your "states rights" blinders on.