[knarf]

Joshua poses a good point ... "an unconstitutional law is no law"

I mulled that over a bit and wondered; Is that true?

I think it's true in the military, that an unlawful order must be followed before you can make an issue of denying it, though of course I may be wrong.

In Joshua's case, I can reflect on my own life when, as a 20 yo, I committed a felonious crime that now, at (almost) 65, having lived a law abiding life, I am still dis-allowed to keep and bear arms, which points directly to Joshu'a point ...

If the gun contol act of 1968 (due mostly to NRA (as I understand it) impetus), is unconstitutional (and of course I say it is), then I should be allowed to keep and carry without having to justify that keeping and carrying other than, I am an American.

[Procyon]

that an unlawful order must be followed before you can make an issue of denying it

In Basic Training you are taught to respond to an unlawful order: Repeat, Refuse, Report. If you obey an unlawful order, you, too, are culpable.

[Sgt_Schultze]

According to the NRA, “In Haynes v U.S. (1968), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that felons do not have to register illegally possessed guns, because the Fifth Amendment protects them against self-incrimination.”

[saleman]

“... can reflect on my own life when, as a 20 yo, I committed a felonious crime that now, at (almost) 65, having lived a law abiding life, I am still dis-allowed to keep and bear arms, which points directly to Joshu’a point ...”

Sorry to hear that. There are so many laws, many of which are felonies, that it is pretty much impossible to not commit a felony. Take this “Gun Free School Act”. If you are within 1000 feet of a school with a weapon then you are a felon. How many schools are within 1000 ft of a road? So, if you are traveling or just going home and pass by a school then you are a felon.

For those that don’t know. A felony is any offense that calls for more than a year in jail. Not, “you serve more than a year in jail”. Nope”you paid a fine” Felony “you plead guilty so there was no trial”felony. “No trial before a jury”. Felony. And then ALL your civil rights are taken from you.

Many laws are just a way for the government to control the populace. When you think about it actually all laws are a way to control the populace.

[Phlyer]

Joshua poses a good point ... "an unconstitutional law is no law"

I mulled that over a bit and wondered; Is that true?

The most famous case in Constitutional law is "Marbury v. Madison." In it, John Marshall the first chief justice of the Supreme Court said just that - a law which violates the Constitution is not valid. It is the precedent which establishes the review power of the Supreme Court, and they would absolutely agree with this.

However, the second part of the precedent in Marbury v. Madison is that the Supreme Court - alone, with no higher review - gets to decide. That part is wrong because ultimately 'We, the People' have the authority, but it's what the federal government follows. Which means that if they do pass an "assault weapons" ban, and the Supreme Court says it is okay (however wrongly) then they can still send the federal marshalls - with guns - to get our guns. Being right on the literal reading of the Constitution does not stop a bullet. Might makes right, and unless 'We, the People' demonstrate our might then others will declare themselves to be right.

On the additional part of your comment - that even though you are a convicted felon you should be able to keep a fiream because you are an American - I'm not sure the Constitution supports your position.

The right of 'the people' to keep and bear arms applies to 'the people.' As used in the Constitution, this is the same as "We, the People" and includes all those who agree to be bound by the Constitution. Those - like felons - who have demonstrated that they do not feel the need to be bound by the law, have removed themselves from the 'body politic' who comprise 'the people.'

Saying that one is willing to abide by *some* of the Constiutionally valid laws but not all of them is the same as saying that one is not bound by the laws - because that person is deciding for himself/herself what they will do, not accepting the decision of 'the people.'

The problem is that there is no provision for demontrated an enduring repentance as a way to re-enter, 'the people.' So, while being 'an American' is not enough, there should be a way for someone to regain their status as one of 'the People.' I'm sympathetic to your situation, even though the issue is not the gun control act of 1968, but the basic body of law addressing the status of convicted felons.

[marktwain]

If the gun contol act of 1968 (due mostly to NRA (as I understand it) impetus)

The NRA fought GCA 1968. Johnson is the primary culprit there. It was passed in another time of high emotions, after the assassination of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy. In a time when the MSM was overwhelmingly dominant. Johnson was another disaster as a President.

[Hulka]

“I think it’s true in the military, that an unlawful order must be followed”

Actually, you have an obligation NOT to follow an illegal order. Moreover, you are obligated to report up-the-chain the illegal order.

If you follow the illegal order then you are committing a crime and will be punished.

[oldfart]

Joseph Story, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court from 1811 to 1845, said in reference to the Constitution, “Certainly all those, who have framed written constitutions, contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.”

Pretty sweeping, I think. But it does leave the interpretation of the Constitution to the ordinary citizen rather than a group of politically appointed lawyers. In other parts of his commentary he also pointed out that our Constitution was written in plain english so that the ordinary citizen COULD interpret it correctly.

So when the Amendment says “... shall not be infringed,” what do YOU think it means? More importantly in these troubled times, what do you think those who would “infringe” on your Second Amendment right should be called? Misinformed or traitors?

[Lancey Howard]

...then I should be allowed to keep and carry without having to justify that keeping and carrying other than, I am an American.

I believe the framers referred to that as an "inalienable right".