Reasonable limits should be placed on the RKBA.



When thinking of the Constitution,  most think it of as having 3 branches, the 
Executive, the Legislative and the Judicial Branch, but the Constitution in 
fact distributes the powers to 3 other groups, the federal govt, the States and 
the People, not necessarily in that order. For instance: 
  
  
Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a freestate , the 
right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.


What does the above mean to you? This is how I read it:

1. As per the Founding Fathers, a regulated militia is necessary (and, right or 
wrong, the Constitution as not been amended to say other wise).

2. The fedl govt hasn't got constitutional authority to stop people from having 
guns, any people, or any guns. It is patently out of their jurisdiction! Any 
USG limitations are an infringement of the rights of all the people, including 
Mexicans who won their independence from Mexico in 1836 and nearly a decade 
later, petitioned to join the USA ..

http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/daybyday/03-02-001.html

and as a Republic, joined the United States 9 years later.
http://www.lsjunction.com/docs/annex.htm

3. The Founders condensed all of the above in a simple, unambiguous single 
(some would say run-on) sentence, seemingly incomprehensible by Supreme Court 
Justices. Those arbitrators of Justice think it gives them the right not only 
to infringe (around the edges) but the power amend or delete as well.

Please note; the Founders did not put any of these limitations on the states, 
but neither did they say “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” could 
not be infringed in anyway. It is not a privilege. Citizens do not require 
permission. The Constitution does not limit the RKBA in any way (e.g., for 
hunting only.) The only way these words can be ignored is by going through the 
amendment process delineated in Article V of the Constitution. Anything less, 
like the Brady Bill or labeling them “assault rifles,” even if thought 
reasonable by 5 or even 9 black-robed tyrants of the SCOTUS, is a breach of the 
Great Contract with the people that created and authorizes the very existent of 
the USG in its entirety. 
  
My conclusion is: We are in fact living under the power of an omniscient 
all-powerful, unlimited defacto govt, which has no resemblance to the one 
authorized. The govt has repeatedly and willfully, ignored the limitations of 
their license and granted them by ratification by the states. They have 
trampled the Constitution to death and are an illegal, unconstitutional, outlaw 
govt which reigns over US. 
  
What part of this do you not agree?



BKBA issue addresed by SCOTUS in Heller case in June 2008 
Http://www.nraila.org/heller/   
If the 2nd amendment does not apply to the states, then neither does the 
first Amendment 
http://www.newswithviews.com/LeMieux/michael115.htm


  
Global gun control law pushed by Secty of State Clinton 
Jim Kouri 
http://www.examiner.com/article/global-gun-control-law-pushed-by-clinton 
  
  
When replying to this message, plz cc [email protected] 
  
To be cont’d tomorrow. 
  
Rich Martin
--




“If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if 
you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come 
to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and 
only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may 
have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish 
than to live as slaves.”
Winston S. Churchill 

 

 

-- 
To join RichsRants, send email to: 
[email protected]

For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/richsrants?hl=en

Reply via email to