Molon Labe
United We Stand and We Shall Stand United!
Please Support Free Republic Today
Got a link for that or at least a reference to which show you saw it on?
Oh...kinda like:
Own a gun?? = NO Obamacare
Not an Obamacare “member?? = GO TO JAIL
Felony arrest for NOT having Obamacare = NO GUNS ANYMORE FOR YOU!!
This is actually an executive order. I am sure he thinks he can circumvent the Constitution.
Please. someone stop him!
This is called being a Dick-tator.
So we just stop doing business with the “Government.”
FUBO
Barry is going further than that. Sat our next door neighbor was at the Gwinnett County gunshow with a friend. The friend was in the process of buying a gun through a private sale when a Fed came up and told him he had to get a background check. The friend told the Fed that the law does not require a background check for private sales and basically to get lost. One thing led to another and a gwinnett county cop was called over. He told the Fed to take a hike.
But the point is the ATF is sending agents out to try to coerce the public into complying with things that are not required by law.
“Obamenace”
Molon Labe!
There is a legal concept called “unconstitutional conditions.” The Supreme Court cases on this have involved the use of highways, telegraph companies and permitting of property use. These have been cases where the state has imposed permit conditions that required the surrender of a constitutionally protected right
“In Southern Pacific Co. V. Denton, 146 U.S. 202, 207, 13 S. Ct. 44, there was under consideration a Texas statute requiring a foreign corporation desiring to do business in the state to agree that it would not remove any suit from a court of the state into the Circuit Court of the United States. This court held the statute invalid, saying:
‘But that statute, requiring the corporation, as a condition precedent to obtaining a permit to do business within the state, to surrender a right and privilege secured to it by the Constitution and laws of the United States, was unconstitutional and void, and could give no validity or effect to any agreement or action of the Corporation in obedience to its provisions.’
See also: Western Union Tel. Co. v. Kansas, 216 U.S. 1, 34-48, 30 S. Ct. 190; Frost v. Railroad Commission of State of California, 271 U.S. 583 (1926,); Pullman Co. v. Kansas, 216 U.S. 56 (30 S. Ct. 232); Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Foster, 247 U.S. 105, 114 (38 S. Ct. 438, 1 A. L. R. 1278).’
There is also the concept of “essential nexus.”
In Dolan v. City of Tigard, No. 93-518 (1994), Chief Justice Rehnquist, delivering the opinion of the Court, further developed the rationale of Nolan in examining the proportionate balance of the regulatory conditions imposed upon use with the severity of the danger or injury the regulations were intended to ameliorate or eliminate:
... “Under the well-settled doctrine of ‘unconstitutional conditions’, the government may not require a person to give up a constitutional right-here the right to receive just compensation when property is taken for a public use-in exchange for a discretionary benefit conferred by the government where the property sought has little or no relationship to the benefit. See Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U. S. 593 (1972); Pickering v. Board of Ed. of Township High School Dist., 391 U. S. 563, 568 (1968).”
Who in their right mind would want to do business with this crony government ?
Sen. John F. Kennedy’s statement, Know Your Lawmakers, Guns, April 1960, p. 4 (1960): “By calling attention to ‘a well regulated militia,’ the ‘security’ of the nation, and the right of each citizen ‘to keep and bear arms,’ our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy. Although it is extremely unlikely that the fears of governmental tyranny which gave rise to the Second Amendment will ever be a major danger to our nation, the Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships, in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important.”
Sen. Hubert Humphrey’s statement, Know Your Lawmakers, Guns, Feb. 1960, p. 4 (1960): “Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms. This is not to say that firearms should not be very carefully used and that definite safety rules of precaution should not be taught and enforced. But the right of citizens to bear arms is just one more guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against a tyranny which now appears remote in America, but which historically has proved to be always possible.”
http://www2.law.ucla.edu/volokh/2amteach/sources.htm
he is going to have a real challenge find business partners under that scenario.
Moronic nonsense, only too typical of our ignorant and benighted excuse for a president, and will be declared unconstitutional and invalidated at the first legal test.
So can we expect “speech control” next?