Knowing what is plainly and clearly delineated in the aforestated, can anyone, without absurdity, find for Congress or any other branch of the Federal government, the ability, the power to regulate arms as they have so done? [More]MOWCA Blog looks at willful ignorance and the Firearms Freedom Acts.
I'd add the term "deliberate indifference."
4 comments:
But the government discussed in those aged documents no longer exists. What we have now is a central, parliamentary government which assumes it is the sole sovereign power.
And the people love it, because it is their god.
It is not willful ignorance nor deliberate indifference. What it is is pretend ignorance(they really know what they are doing is wrong) and deliberate debilitation (nothing indifferent about it, it is on purpose).
I am convinced that, even if the commerce clause could be determined to give the Congress the power to regulate and or otherwise control the use of firearms, the 2nd Amendment effectively trumps the commerce clause as far as firearms matters are concerned. Reference the definition of the word ”Amendment”.
People seem to want to consider what is referred to as the "Bill of Rights" as separate from the Constitution. Those ten amendments are not a separate document.
Those ten amendments changed and overruled everything in the Constitution that went before them as do all the other amendments.
It makes no difference what anti-gunners want the commerce clause to say. The 2nd Amendment says, "Shall not be infringed."
There isn't a second sentence, following that period, that would allow the federal government to regulate anything, nor allow the congress to establish a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms whose agents routinely stomp on the Constitution.
[W-III]
Ok, that's it WWW, I don't believe you were ever law enforcement! You believe too much in liberty. I could like you. Not something I can say about the very great majority of LEO's.
Post a Comment