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

To: All

I have read some more comments and suggest that y’all abandon this confiscation idea. Confiscation will require a costitutional amendment, just like an amendment was needed to end savery. All he can do now is ban new firearms of certain kinds; it explains the current rush on gun stores. If the Republicans do not block this law, they are no better than their Democratnik counteparts. Educate yourself; look up “ex post facto.”


51 posted on 11/09/2008 4:18:01 AM PST by Pelagius of Asturias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: Pelagius of Asturias

You mean like new taxes not being made retroactive?


64 posted on 11/09/2008 5:05:19 AM PST by 03A3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: Pelagius of Asturias
Confiscation will require a Constitutional Amendment, just like an amendment was needed to end slavery. \

It was not needed in California for the SKS rifle confiscation. Which by the way, was totally unsuccessful. I believe that around 2% of the SKS's were actually registered and then the owners found out they were lied to by the government (shocking!) and ordered them confiscated.

This is according to an unverified source . . .

http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Rabbi_0205.htm

but the interesting thing is that it is the ONLY source (that I have found) that gets right to the point.

Now, do not mistake this for a statement that Hussein the Merciful will not sign off on a total ban and confiscation of semi-autos (long guns and hand guns) if the paperwork reaches his desk. I have no doubt that that Fearless Leader, Cobammunist 1, would request such legislation from Congress for him to sign.

But it has got to get there via the normal channels. In the meantime his tall talk is only providing a form of "economic stimulus" for gun shops across the nation. American Citizens are buying everything they can get their hands on.

And that is a VERY good thing.

65 posted on 11/09/2008 5:10:21 AM PST by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: Pelagius of Asturias

thems a couple of them there restraints in the constitution that irritates him. We gots to have a convention and make comprimises on a new constitution.


69 posted on 11/09/2008 5:23:09 AM PST by Billg64 (LOL ROFL Senator Mccain for what????)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: Pelagius of Asturias
Ex-post facto prohibitions did not stop the prohibition of anyone who had ever been convicted of an act of domestic violence from being prohibited a firearm, even if the conviction was decades prior to the prohibition.

While Constitutionally, I feel you are correct, these people have no intent of going by the Constitution, only forcing their agendae around it. They view it as an obstacle to be overcome, not a valid and just limitation of governmental power.

122 posted on 11/09/2008 9:16:57 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

To: Pelagius of Asturias
Confiscation will require a costitutional amendment

Not very imaginative, are you? Tell me, do you think that the ownership of living cannibus plants is protected from seizure? No, of course not. They have been declared "contraband." Tell me what happens if Congress passes and Obama signs a law stating that all magazine fed semi-automatic rifles of greater than .21 caliber are contraband, along with the magazines and any other accessories, since they are so dangerous. A compliant Supreme Court will say that such is a "reasonable regulation" (as mentioned in the Heller case), and therefore doesn't violate the 2nd Amendment. All that you need is 1 justice to change his mind, or to be "unavailable" to hear the case. "Change his mind" and "Unavailable" can occur many ways, and in countries that have previously banned weapons to the civilian populace, many strange things have happened to opponents of the regime.

In short, please don't be naive. Under our law you are, of course, correct. Just don't assume that things will necessarily stay the same.

158 posted on 11/09/2008 3:11:36 PM PST by Ancesthntr (An ex-citizen of the Frederation dedicated to stopping the Obamination from becoming President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies ]

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