Posted on 06/03/2013 12:40:35 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
LLS
The Senate cannot be in valid session unless a quorum is present. Of course, I believe a member must demand a quorum call to put this provision into effect.
Will this include fast and furious?
.
.
Blue Glasers
S-S-S
get real Lucille
.
.
The Blue states that contain most of the population, are on the move to further restrict 2nd Amendment Rights. That Nebraska and most other red states have loosened their laws is small comfort to those that reside in a formerly red but now blue state.
That Alaska, Arizona, and New Hampshire all have Constitutional carry laws means little to those residing in a “may issue” (not/never) state like California, whose population in any of its major cities out strip the total combined populations of those states.
In 1986 41 states were no-issue or may issue. By 2013 41 states were shall-issue or unrestricted, with IL poised to at least partially leave the gun-control camp.
Here’s a really neat graph showing the change over this period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rtc2.gif
Less than 30 years. Going from 41 states for gun control (using broad terms) to 41 states with fewer gun restrictions. And gun rights are losing ground? Can’t you take yes for an answer? This sounds much like the civil rights groups who are constantly complaining that racism is no better or maybe even worse than 50 years.
Please write Gov.s Hickenlooper (D-Co) and Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown (D-Ca) and set them and their legislatures straight!
They don’t. The Constitution is crystal clear on this, and an EO attempt by Obama will not pass legal scrutiny.
Even if they ratified, how can any treaty supersede the Law of the Law...the Constitution?
If they pass a U.N. treaty that says all power belongs to the U.N., that’s the ‘new law’? What other Rights do they think they can give away w/out Our say? Don’t think so.
US out of the UN, UN off US soil!
I wonder how long Lurch’s coffin needs to be?
Well, it’s like this. There are “the Rojos on one side of town, the Baxters on the other, and” they’re all retarded liars. The Senate has to ratify, but that wouldn’t even do it. Our Constitution rules.
Constitutional Limitations on the Treaty Power
Justia.com
http://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-2/19-constitutional-limitations-on-treaty-power.html
Excerpt:
“As statutes may be held void because they contravene the Constitution, it should follow that treaties may be held void, the Constitution being superior to both. And indeed the Court has numerous times so stated.”
TREATIES DO NOT SUPERCEDE THE CONSTITUTION
http://www.famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/Articles/Treaties.htm
What you say is true.
LLS
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.
