Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Federalism Debate [And 'States Rights']
Cato Institue ^ | 10/28/04 | Rodger Pilon

Posted on 10/28/2004 6:03:10 PM PDT by tpaine

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380381-391 last
To: RayStacy

I WANT MY GUNS!! AND I DON'T CARE HOW I GET THEM. I will not, however, pretend that the BOR dictates it. Now does that convince you that I love
guns? Or am I still just a faker?
-ray-

______________________________________


I'm more convinced that ever that you are deeply confused.

Get some rest.


381 posted on 11/11/2004 5:24:01 PM PST by tpaine (No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another. - T. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: tpaine

Get a clue.


382 posted on 11/11/2004 6:04:53 PM PST by RayStacy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies]

To: RayStacy
As I stated earlier -- because the CONS has been utterly destroyed by both the Congress and the SC since at least 1937

Are you referring to the wholesale expansion of the size and reach of the Federal government via the Commerce Clause?

It still plagues us today with a huge Federal bureaucracy involving itself in areas such as health care, domestic crime, and education.

Interestingly enough, all Federal gun laws were passed using the Commerce Clause as the grant of authority.

383 posted on 11/11/2004 6:46:43 PM PST by Ken H
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 380 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Wrong. The 'people' have no such authority to so delegate, -- under our republican form of Constitutional government.

...

It defies all common sense to write a Constitution for a United States, then claim that separate States can ignore its Amendments protecting individual rights. It is constitutionally illegitimate for a state to infringe on our RKBA's.

If I thought as you do, that the supremacy clause applies the BOR to the states, then I would agree. But I don't.

384 posted on 11/11/2004 7:19:39 PM PST by Database
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 359 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

That is exactly what I am referring to, and of course, all federal gun laws are completely unconstitutional.


385 posted on 11/11/2004 7:20:56 PM PST by RayStacy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
Isn't a government violating a fundamental right by removing your means of defending yourself and your family?

Government is certainly infringing when it removes a means of self defense. But governments are infringement machines, which is why we want them to be limited in scope.

If your State outlawed gun ownership, would you turn in your firearms?

I'll decline to answer this one on the grounds that the issue if civil disobedience is getting a bit far from the original issue of Federalism (;^)

386 posted on 11/11/2004 7:31:52 PM PST by Database
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 365 | View Replies]

To: Database
Database wrote:

If I thought as you do, that the supremacy clause applies the BOR to the states, then I would agree. But I don't.

Why do you think CA can legitimately infringe on your right to own a socalled 'assault rifle'?

387 posted on 11/11/2004 8:44:02 PM PST by tpaine (No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another. - T. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 384 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
Why do you think CA can legitimately infringe on your right to own a socalled 'assault rifle'?

I can find nothing in the California constitution which prohibits the state legislature from writing such a law. So I have to conclude that the law is legally legitimate.

388 posted on 11/11/2004 9:28:47 PM PST by Database
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 387 | View Replies]

To: Database





We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good.
-- Hillary Clinton

I can find nothing in the California constitution which prohibits the state legislature from writing such a law. So I have to conclude that the law is legally legitimate.
-- Database


Simple, clear purpose and principles give rise to complex intelligent behavior.
[Blindly following] Complex rules and regulations give rise to simple stupid behavior.
-- Dee Hock


389 posted on 11/12/2004 5:28:19 AM PST by tpaine (No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another. - T. Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 388 | View Replies]

BUMP


390 posted on 08/25/2005 10:16:01 AM PDT by hypocrite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 383 | View Replies]

To: RayStacy

I see you discovered tpaine's true nature :)
I also see that he's outa here. Good Riddance.


391 posted on 10/10/2005 4:49:21 PM PDT by H.Akston (It's all about property rights)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340341-360361-380381-391 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson