Buttgiggity
Posted on 04/21/2019 9:05:00 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Even if the 2nd Amendment (2A) was repealed, it remains that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the corrupt, post-17th Amendment ratification feds the specific power to make peacetime civil penal laws for gun-control purposes.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
In other words, Mr. Buttigieg, like other desperate Democratic presidential candidates, is unsurprisingly willing to tell pro-gun control people whatever they want to hear to win their votes, such candidates undoubtedly hoping that pro-2A patriots stay home on election day.
But in stark contrast to Buttigieg's gun-control rhetoric, the congressional record shows that Rep. John Bingham, a constitutional lawmaker, had clarified that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific powers to make peacetime civil penal laws, not even for murder.
"Our Constitution never conferred upon the Congress of the United States the power - sacred as life is, first as it is before all other rights which pertain to man on this side of the grave - to protect it in time of peace by the terrors of the penal code within organized states; and Congress has never attempted to do it. There never was a law upon the United States statute-book to punish the murderer for taking away in time of peace the life of the noblest, and the most unoffending, as well, of your citizens, within the limits of any State of the Union, The protection of the citizen in that respect was left to the respective States, and there the power is to-day [emphases added].” —Rep. John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See bottom half of third column.)
Bingham was clarifying that the 14th Amendment (14A) gave Congress new power to make laws dealing with constitutionally enumerated rights, gun-related laws in this example.
More specifically, the congressional record also shows that when Bingham read the Bill of Rights as examples of constitutionally enumerated rights that 14A applies to the states he, included 2nd Amendment.
John Bingham, Congressional Globe. (See 2nd Amendment (Article II) about in middle of 2nd column.)
In stark contrast to unconstitutional federal gun control laws now in the books, Congress's 14A power is limited only to strengthening constitutionally enumerated rights like the 2nd Amendment, strengthening such rights by making peacetime penal laws that discourage state actors, not ordinary citizens, from abridging constitutionally enumerated rights. (Note that since patriots have grown up with unconstitutional federal gun-control laws, they unthinkingly presume that such laws must somehow be constitutional.)
The Supreme Court had put it this way in Minor v. Happersett.
“3. The right of suffrage was not necessarily one of the privileges or immunities of citizenship before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that amendment does not add to these privileges and immunities. It simply furnishes additional guaranty for the protection of such as the citizen already had [emphasis added].” —Minor v. Happersett, 1874.
In other words, the only peacetime civil gun laws that any president can sign into law in the name of protecting and defending the Constitution must reasonably STRENGTHEN gun rights imo, not limit that right.
It is disturbing that federal civil gun control laws seem to have started appearing in the books during the time of Democrat FDR. FDR and the Democratic congress at that time are infamous for making laws that Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.
Franklin Roosevelt: The Father of Gun Control
Patriots need to support PDJT by not only electing a new patriot Congress in the 2020 elections that will promise to support PDJT's vision for MAGA, but will also promise to take unconstitutional federal gun control laws out of the books, replacing them with laws that strengthen 2A protections.
Remember in November 2020!
MAGA!
Corrections, insights welcome.
To is supposed to be two...sorry
Shut up Pete or I’ll pinch your nipple clamps.
Buttgiggity
ping to #24
Show me “peacetime” and I will decide which guns are appropriate.
The democrats don’t show peace. They are the reason I arm.
Yet not ONE of his proposals would have prevented any of the numerous shootings. Not ONE!
But he speaks “fluent binary”.
I know where there are a number of weapons that have done less damage in the prior 100 years than Teddy Kennedy’s Oldsmobile.
“Never Forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn’t allow him to do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians.”—-author unknown
Here’s a question for you:
Mayor Pete is the Wife in this gay marriage.
He & his HUSBAND want to have a child.
Then-—who gets to take the Paid Parental Leave when that happens.???
A President just takes Leave???
Paid at the rate of $400,000 annually ????
He also believes sodomy is compatible with Leviticus 20:13.
This spawn of Satan will burn in the lake of fire — eternally.
Pete Buttigieg is an exceptionally smart man. He understands two things: the 2d Amendment has nothing to do with sporting pursuits or hobbies, and that the only way to achieve his unconstitutional goals is to deceive Americans.
The most important Amendment is the 1st because stifling speech would be the first attempt of a corrupt government to impose tyranny over liberty and freedom. If that failed, they would attempt to achieve their desires through force. That’s why is 2d Amendment is next in the pecking order. The people must have the capability of thwarting a tyrant like King George III should we make the mistake of electing such a person. The purpose of militia has nothing to do with hunting, marksmanship, or gun collecting. It is all about countering armed threats external and internal, including our own government. Petey knows this, so he has to mislead his followers and many others who are not paying attention.
Shall not be infringed
Let’s keep the memes flowing until this doofus is nothing more than a punchline.
This is not " peacetime in America"
Conservatives are being relentlessly threatened and attacked as well as the Constitution.
What is the Social Security gun ban?
All firearms were/are the product of war technology, so the “weapons of war” claim is just wrong. And semi auto firearms are the majority of the 300 million guns legally owned in the US.
And say we do ban and confiscate all “weapons of war”, does that mean there will never again be a school shooting? Virginia Tech shooting was just with handguns and it had the largest number killed I believe. Texas tower shooting was with what could be defined as a bolt action hunting rifle. And can we pass a law that people with criminal intent won’t break?
Or is this just another lying politition preying on the ignorant in the incremental goal of banning all guns...
Here is a link to the highly suppressed 1982 senate Report on the 2nd Amendment, along with a state court case from 1840s Georgia.
http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/87senrpt.pdf
19. * Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846).”’The right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people,old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of everydescription, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, orbroken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearingup and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State.”
Now you see why this report has been suppressed and is now out of print. I have a paper copy from the US Government printing house.
Just because the actual amendments say exactly the opposite, it's no indication that that's what they really MEAN. You have to wait for a fag liberal douchebag twit to spell it out for you, you unwashed bumpkins.
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.