Ed Stone thinks the Firearms Freedom Acts promise more than they can deliver.
He has the integrity to share his forum with Gary Marbut's opposing view.
That's how you know you're dealing with good people.
Tuesday, January 26, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
The various Firearm Freedom Acts, both proposed and passed, are but volleys fired in our ongoing war against the US government.
Make no mistake about it, folks, we're at war against the most dangerous entity on planet earth, the US government.
We will win, there will be more casualties beyond those already dead or in prison today.
It is only a losing proposition if the faint-hearts do not follow suit. 40 states doing the same, might just make the feds back up and look one more time at their hole card.
David, You've already seen this.
My post to Ed Stone's GRE column:
I would argue that since the 2nd Amendment has been determined to protect an enumerated individual right (Heller) and that the possession of marijuana, even though may be it should be, has not been determined to be a fundamental right and is assuredly not an enumerated right specifically protected by amendment to the Constitution . Gonzales v Raich is, post Heller, irrelevant to the present discussion.
I submit that the 2nd amendment trumps the commerce clause as it, along with the other nine amendments in the Bill of Rights, was very likely intended to do by the folks who insisted upon and ratified a bill of rights back in 1787-91. The Anti-federalists and other concerned citizens saw in the body of the 1787 Constitution several areas that they foresaw would place following generations of Americans in danger of despotism and tyranny. The 1st ten amendments were INTENDED to change, alter, correct, rectify, and/or improve the original version of the Constitution.
[W-III]
Post a Comment