Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions

saintfan · 01-16-2013, 10:27 PM

Originally Posted by OldMaid

Sates have rights within the laws/rights of the USA. United STATES of AMERICA.
When is the Fed govt., USA overstepping THEIR rights into THEIR states's rights?
Not much really.
USA owns the states. States are not little foreign countries or parts of the Commonwealth free to do as they please and have laws, body of govt., head of state differnt from those of the USA.

This is where I think you fall off the wagon. I mean no offense, but it is clear to me that you don't fully understand what is framed in the Constitution and why it was very carefully framed precisely the way if was framed.

What you don't seem to recognize is the extremely slippery slope - the precariousness of an executive order that allows your doctor to quiz you on whether or not you own a gun.

Yes. That's right. Of the 23 executive orders, one of them grants the Federal Government the right to seize your gun, with ZERO just cause other than what it decides it wants to make up. It can then run a complete background check on you and may or may not (we all know not) return your fire arm. Through Obamacare, your physician can now legally inquire about your status as a gun owner. Why? You know why don't you?

That is not freedom. That is not liberty. That is big brother coming one giant step closer to eliminating your Constitution rights.

With all due respect, you should wake up. This is NOT business as usual. You need to listen very carefully to what the likes of Obama, Biden, Pelosi and their like are saying. Read between the lines. If you do, and if you truly value your freedom, you will become very afraid of what is going on in this country.

Very afraid indeed.

arsaint · 01-17-2013, 12:47 AM

Physician: "Are there are firearms in your home?"

AR: "Nope - we have an abortion doctor, a member of the Weather Underground, and a few of the leaders of the Arab Spring living with us. Our President says that is much safer."

Physician: "Seriously, do you own any firearms?"

AR: "Now why would I need one of those? Obama has "solved" the gun violence in this nation by assuming dictator status and urinating on the Constitution!"

What's that line from Star Wars when the Emperor takes over???

Liberty Dies - YouTube

Crusader · 01-17-2013, 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by saintfan

A Constitutionalist would tell you it is very simple. The powers granted to the Government are extremely limited...EXTREMELY limited...on purpose.

From the beginning there has been a faction of American's who have attempted to circumvent and even eliminate it. It isn't anything new. The Constitution says:

The Fed can borrow money
It can collect taxes to pay the bills
It regulates commerce with other nations and between states
It prints money
It controls naturalization
It handles the mail
It provides an Army and the Navy

And that's about it really. The Constitution references a provision for the "general welfare" of the people, and of course that has been interpreted as a validation for any and every social policy under the sun.

So then, when the Fed wants to force citizens to buy health insurance (unConstitutional) it simply says it's for the 'general welfare' and calls it a tax.

Now you tell me. Is that overstepping the Federal powers provided in the Constitution?

Not trying to start an argument here I will say that I personally believe that every persons opinion on wether the government is overstepping its limits will depend on how that person feels about the specific issue.

Lets say John supports a ban on guns, he'll probably be ok with the government banning them on account of 'general welfare' while Clark who is opposed the ban will think the government is clearly overreaching its limits.

While when the government wants to ban refined sugar for the 'general welfare' since it causes obesity and other health related issues John will be outraged, turns out he is a farmer and grows sugarr canes. Clark on the other hand is a city slicker who eats pretty healthy aleady so this will not affect him in any big way so he is fine with it.

This is just a made up example of how I believe people think. You tend to get upset when something affects you but if it doesn't its much easier to just be okay with it. My experience is tha very few people will stick to their priciples if they have something to gain (or a percieved gain) fom straying from them.

OldMaid · 01-17-2013, 09:31 AM

Arsaint, I am not insulted or anything.

Crusader, I agree with you.

Arsaint, we can go back and forth all day.
Biden, Pelosi, OBAMA!!!!! OBAMA, oh scary Obama, you all give him way too much credit. He is PofTUSA. That is all. Four years, he is over and out and the next one comes in. Laws per party tend to change.
Really, the end of world and USA did not happen four years ago.
I do recognize it is a slippery slope between states's rights and national rights.
Thanks to checks/balances, it sort of pulls back and forth.

Crusader explained it best.
I have said before. Rights, rights , rights!! I really get tired of the arugement about rights because everybody has /wants rights. Problem is, starts when one group/gender/sexual orientation/religion/pro-abortion/anti-abortion etc, wants their rights but not rights for the others.

TheOak · 01-17-2013, 10:49 AM

I am a strict Constitutionalist.

1. The Federal Government does NOT own the United States of America.

The United States of America is a Republic, not a democracy. It is a Country comprised of 50 states, Congress and the Senate are comprised of representatives of those 50 states. Those representatives are elected through a democratic process. Laws are decided by Congress and the Senate and inked by The President. There is a system of checks and balances that outline the path from Bill to law.

Executive Order:
"United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself."

The President does have the power of "Executive order", but it is a "discretionary power" not "absolute power". The Constitution of The United States has no stipulation granting this to the President. Executive Order is a power that certain bodies have "interpreted" from the Constitution.

Obama is threatening to use executive order for gun control. He needs to understand that he DOES NOT have absolute power to issue executive orders unchecked. This means that the Supreme Court will likely strike down his Executive Order based on Constitutionality.

"Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution".

So... In the absence of a federal law State laws prevail, and federal laws are decided by Congress and the Senate.

Obama in all of his delusional grandeur has taken it upon him self to try and turn the United States into an Absolute Monarchy/Autocracy.

I took an oath on April 27th 1989 to defend this countrys Constitution from enemy's foreign and domestic. I take my oath very seriously and literally. Literally meaning supporting and defending The Constitution.

The Constitution of the United States was written to separate the governing of The Republic of The United States from the way other countries are governed, to be an original. There was and still is a GOOD reason for that.

“History is a gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

What separates the Framers from Today's politicians? Quite frankly focus. Our Framers were focused on the experiment of creating the greatest nation on the planet and today's politicians are focused on being reelected.

“There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

This Nation has become what it is through laziness and weak people.

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

2. Every persons opinion on whether the Government is overstepping its boundaries is moot. The Constitution outlines the boundaries. In order to protect all people from the needs of the few there is no room for interpretation. Those who interpret the Constitution loosely are the lazy and unwilling.

saintfan · 01-17-2013, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by TheOak

I am a strict Constitutionalist.

1. The Federal Government does NOT own the United States of America.

The United States of America is a Republic, not a democracy. It is a Country comprised of 50 states, Congress and the Senate are comprised of representatives of those 50 states. Those representatives are elected through a democratic process. Laws are decided by Congress and the Senate and inked by The President. There is a system of checks and balances that outline the path from Bill to law.

Executive Order:
"United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself."

The President does have the power of "Executive order", but it is a "discretionary power" not "absolute power". The Constitution of The United States has no stipulation granting this to the President. Executive Order is a power that certain bodies have "interpreted" from the Constitution.

Obama is threatening to use executive order for gun control. He needs to understand that he DOES NOT have absolute power to issue executive orders unchecked. This means that the Supreme Court will likely strike down his Executive Order based on Constitutionality.

"Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution".

So... In the absence of a federal law State laws prevail, and federal laws are decided by Congress and the Senate.

Obama in all of his delusional grandeur has taken it upon him self to try and turn the United States into an Absolute Monarchy/Autocracy.

I took an oath on April 27th 1989 to defend this countrys Constitution from enemy's foreign and domestic. I take my oath very seriously and literally. Literally meaning supporting and defending The Constitution.

The Constitution of the United States was written to separate the governing of The Republic of The United States from the way other countries are governed, to be an original. There was and still is a GOOD reason for that.

“History is a gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

What separates the Framers from Today's politicians? Quite frankly focus. Our Framers were focused on the experiment of creating the greatest nation on the planet and today's politicians are focused on being reelected.

“There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

This Nation has become what it is through laziness and weak people.

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

2. Every persons opinion on whether the Government is overstepping its boundaries is moot. The Constitution outlines the boundaries. In order to protect all people from the needs of the few there is no room for interpretation. Those who interpret the Constitution loosely are the lazy and unwilling.

What I really needed was a "LOVE" button. Make it happen Halo!

Danno · 01-17-2013, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by TheOak

I am a strict Constitutionalist.

1. The Federal Government does NOT own the United States of America.

The United States of America is a Republic, not a democracy. It is a Country comprised of 50 states, Congress and the Senate are comprised of representatives of those 50 states. Those representatives are elected through a democratic process. Laws are decided by Congress and the Senate and inked by The President. There is a system of checks and balances that outline the path from Bill to law.

Executive Order:
"United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself."

The President does have the power of "Executive order", but it is a "discretionary power" not "absolute power". The Constitution of The United States has no stipulation granting this to the President. Executive Order is a power that certain bodies have "interpreted" from the Constitution.

Obama is threatening to use executive order for gun control. He needs to understand that he DOES NOT have absolute power to issue executive orders unchecked. This means that the Supreme Court will likely strike down his Executive Order based on Constitutionality.

"Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution".

So... In the absence of a federal law State laws prevail, and federal laws are decided by Congress and the Senate.

Obama in all of his delusional grandeur has taken it upon him self to try and turn the United States into an Absolute Monarchy/Autocracy.

I took an oath on April 27th 1989 to defend this countrys Constitution from enemy's foreign and domestic. I take my oath very seriously and literally. Literally meaning supporting and defending The Constitution.

The Constitution of the United States was written to separate the governing of The Republic of The United States from the way other countries are governed, to be an original. There was and still is a GOOD reason for that.

“History is a gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

What separates the Framers from Today's politicians? Quite frankly focus. Our Framers were focused on the experiment of creating the greatest nation on the planet and today's politicians are focused on being reelected.

“There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

This Nation has become what it is through laziness and weak people.

“Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.”
― Alexis de Tocqueville

2. Every persons opinion on whether the Government is overstepping its boundaries is moot. The Constitution outlines the boundaries. In order to protect all people from the needs of the few there is no room for interpretation. Those who interpret the Constitution loosely are the lazy and unwilling.

My favorite post of 2013 so far, and there have been many many good one's to choose from.

saintfan · 01-17-2013, 12:05 PM

Originally Posted by Crusader

Not trying to start an argument here I will say that I personally believe that every persons opinion on wether the government is overstepping its limits will depend on how that person feels about the specific issue.

Lets say John supports a ban on guns, he'll probably be ok with the government banning them on account of 'general welfare' while Clark who is opposed the ban will think the government is clearly overreaching its limits.

While when the government wants to ban refined sugar for the 'general welfare' since it causes obesity and other health related issues John will be outraged, turns out he is a farmer and grows sugarr canes. Clark on the other hand is a city slicker who eats pretty healthy aleady so this will not affect him in any big way so he is fine with it.

This is just a made up example of how I believe people think. You tend to get upset when something affects you but if it doesn't its much easier to just be okay with it. My experience is tha very few people will stick to their priciples if they have something to gain (or a percieved gain) fom straying from them.

Ah, but see, that's the problem. Someone's opinion is just that. It's their opinion.

John and Clark can go jump in the lake. The Federal Government DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BAN GUNS. It is FORBIDDEN from this through the Constitution.

John and Clark can fight amongst themselves over refined sugar too, because, there again, the Federal Government DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY through the Constitution to ban refined Sugar.

The idea behind the Constitution is to manage the thing you mention in your last paragraph. People tend to want what THEY want for their own reasons. That is certainly human nature. The Constitution prevents this corruption - and this is why Amending that document is akin to moving mountains.

The Fed has been bastardized through interpretation where none is necessary. See, there are those who see the Constitution as a flawed document (Obama, Pelosi, etc) and they effort daily to undermine it in favor of their own, personal view. Obama doesn't want guns. He will lie, market, manipulate, issue illegal executive orders, and on and on until his agenda is met. This is how we ended up with Obamacare. Precisely how. The Supreme Court, at quite the last minute, had to label it a tax to push it through, even though Obama is on record stating it is not a tax BEFORE it went to the Supreme Court. Ah, but the fix was in. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a Conspiracy fact.

And this is nothing new. It goes back to the Great Depression and even before. The biggest issue is that the liberals have succeeded. The population is at a tipping point. Through social programs enacted by a Government that never had the Constitutional authority to enact them, the Fed now has the numbers to further its agenda. This has been cooking, quite by design, for over a hundred years.

Can you see it? This is why people like me are so furious. This is why I can tell liberals to go to hell. Truth be told, most people in America that "I" would call a liberal don't really understand. They don't know their own history. They don't grasp the true brilliance of the Constitution - what the men who wrote it had experienced themselves and what they were so eloquently trying to avoid.

So these people think they have some kind of 'better way'. There is no history of it. In fact the policies they support are known to fail by those of us who actually take the time to explore them beyond the "hey, that's a good idea" point.

We are not arbitrarily bashing Obama. We see what's going on. He's not the devil. He's just the most recent demon. There have been many who came before him.

TheOak · 01-17-2013, 12:48 PM

What liberals and the remainder of the world process/practice is not Utopia, it is hypocrisy.

The liberal mindset - People do not have the capacity to make decisions for them selves to the Government must do it.

Government = People. See the flaw in that plan?

The Government people should decide what healthcare the people get, the Government people do not have to use the same healthcare that the people do.
FactCheck.org : Health Care for Members of Congress?

People should drive fuel efficient vehicles. The Government people travel in motorcades of armor plated 9 MPG Suburbans, and fly 10 people to a 747.
File:Barack Obama's presidential motorcade en route to Camp Victory 4-7-09 2.JPG - Wikimedia Commons

People cant decide whether they own guns, who do they need protection from... The Government that is protected by guns should decide that.
Obama Signs Law Giving Himself Armed Guards for Life

Only Law Enforcement and Military should posses guns - How is that working out?
Nidal Malik Hasan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

People shouldn't decide what food they consume... The government people should decide that....
Obama’s pre-debate meal: Steak and potatoes

American People live a life of excess, the Government is who should dictate moderation. PLEASE explain this one to me.
54 Christmas trees in White House

The Government has decided that the American People are not on control of their debt, guns, diet, healthcare, or spending... The Government practices absolutely ZERO self-restraint in any of the fore mentioned items. The out and out travesty is they DO NOT do any of this with THEIR OWN money.

So, in regards to our Hypocritical Government and those blind hypocrites that support them and believe they have our best interest... Have a hearty F-U, and stay out of mu business. I have no criminal record.

What does all of the regulation breed? Ignorant, weak, vulnerable drones.

Danno · 01-17-2013, 12:58 PM

Oak is on fire!!!

01-16-2013, 10:27 PM	#11
saintfan Site Donor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 9,541 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions Originally Posted by OldMaid Sates have rights within the laws/rights of the USA. United STATES of AMERICA. When is the Fed govt., USA overstepping THEIR rights into THEIR states's rights? Not much really. USA owns the states. States are not little foreign countries or parts of the Commonwealth free to do as they please and have laws, body of govt., head of state differnt from those of the USA. This is where I think you fall off the wagon. I mean no offense, but it is clear to me that you don't fully understand what is framed in the Constitution and why it was very carefully framed precisely the way if was framed. What you don't seem to recognize is the extremely slippery slope - the precariousness of an executive order that allows your doctor to quiz you on whether or not you own a gun. Yes. That's right. Of the 23 executive orders, one of them grants the Federal Government the right to seize your gun, with ZERO just cause other than what it decides it wants to make up. It can then run a complete background check on you and may or may not (we all know not) return your fire arm. Through Obamacare, your physician can now legally inquire about your status as a gun owner. Why? You know why don't you? That is not freedom. That is not liberty. That is big brother coming one giant step closer to eliminating your Constitution rights. With all due respect, you should wake up. This is NOT business as usual. You need to listen very carefully to what the likes of Obama, Biden, Pelosi and their like are saying. Read between the lines. If you do, and if you truly value your freedom, you will become very afraid of what is going on in this country. Very afraid indeed. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook! Danno likes this.
	Trust in Allah, but tie up your camel...

01-17-2013, 01:33 AM	#13
Crusader Resident Swede Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Märsta, Sweden Posts: 3,904	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions Originally Posted by saintfan A Constitutionalist would tell you it is very simple. The powers granted to the Government are extremely limited...EXTREMELY limited...on purpose. From the beginning there has been a faction of American's who have attempted to circumvent and even eliminate it. It isn't anything new. The Constitution says: The Fed can borrow money It can collect taxes to pay the bills It regulates commerce with other nations and between states It prints money It controls naturalization It handles the mail It provides an Army and the Navy And that's about it really. The Constitution references a provision for the "general welfare" of the people, and of course that has been interpreted as a validation for any and every social policy under the sun. So then, when the Fed wants to force citizens to buy health insurance (unConstitutional) it simply says it's for the 'general welfare' and calls it a tax. Now you tell me. Is that overstepping the Federal powers provided in the Constitution? Not trying to start an argument here I will say that I personally believe that every persons opinion on wether the government is overstepping its limits will depend on how that person feels about the specific issue. Lets say John supports a ban on guns, he'll probably be ok with the government banning them on account of 'general welfare' while Clark who is opposed the ban will think the government is clearly overreaching its limits. While when the government wants to ban refined sugar for the 'general welfare' since it causes obesity and other health related issues John will be outraged, turns out he is a farmer and grows sugarr canes. Clark on the other hand is a city slicker who eats pretty healthy aleady so this will not affect him in any big way so he is fine with it. This is just a made up example of how I believe people think. You tend to get upset when something affects you but if it doesn't its much easier to just be okay with it. My experience is tha very few people will stick to their priciples if they have something to gain (or a percieved gain) fom straying from them. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook! OldMaid likes this.
	You kids get off my lawn!

01-17-2013, 09:31 AM	#14
OldMaid Site Donor Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,432	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions Arsaint, I am not insulted or anything. Crusader, I agree with you. Arsaint, we can go back and forth all day. Biden, Pelosi, OBAMA!!!!! OBAMA, oh scary Obama, you all give him way too much credit. He is PofTUSA. That is all. Four years, he is over and out and the next one comes in. Laws per party tend to change. Really, the end of world and USA did not happen four years ago. I do recognize it is a slippery slope between states's rights and national rights. Thanks to checks/balances, it sort of pulls back and forth. Crusader explained it best. I have said before. Rights, rights , rights!! I really get tired of the arugement about rights because everybody has /wants rights. Problem is, starts when one group/gender/sexual orientation/religion/pro-abortion/anti-abortion etc, wants their rights but not rights for the others. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!
OldMaid Site Donor Join Date: Feb 2010 Posts: 1,432

01-17-2013, 10:49 AM	#15
TheOak Site Donor Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 7,631	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions I am a strict Constitutionalist. 1. The Federal Government does NOT own the United States of America. The United States of America is a Republic, not a democracy. It is a Country comprised of 50 states, Congress and the Senate are comprised of representatives of those 50 states. Those representatives are elected through a democratic process. Laws are decided by Congress and the Senate and inked by The President. There is a system of checks and balances that outline the path from Bill to law. Executive Order: "United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself." The President does have the power of "Executive order", but it is a "discretionary power" not "absolute power". The Constitution of The United States has no stipulation granting this to the President. Executive Order is a power that certain bodies have "interpreted" from the Constitution. Obama is threatening to use executive order for gun control. He needs to understand that he DOES NOT have absolute power to issue executive orders unchecked. This means that the Supreme Court will likely strike down his Executive Order based on Constitutionality. "Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution". So... In the absence of a federal law State laws prevail, and federal laws are decided by Congress and the Senate. Obama in all of his delusional grandeur has taken it upon him self to try and turn the United States into an Absolute Monarchy/Autocracy. I took an oath on April 27th 1989 to defend this countrys Constitution from enemy's foreign and domestic. I take my oath very seriously and literally. Literally meaning supporting and defending The Constitution. The Constitution of the United States was written to separate the governing of The Republic of The United States from the way other countries are governed, to be an original. There was and still is a GOOD reason for that. “History is a gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville What separates the Framers from Today's politicians? Quite frankly focus. Our Framers were focused on the experiment of creating the greatest nation on the planet and today's politicians are focused on being reelected. “There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville This Nation has become what it is through laziness and weak people. “Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville 2. Every persons opinion on whether the Government is overstepping its boundaries is moot. The Constitution outlines the boundaries. In order to protect all people from the needs of the few there is no room for interpretation. Those who interpret the Constitution loosely are the lazy and unwilling. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook! saintfan, Danno and OldMaid like this.
	You should expect some in my replies.

01-17-2013, 11:13 AM	#16
saintfan Site Donor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 9,541 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions Originally Posted by TheOak I am a strict Constitutionalist. 1. The Federal Government does NOT own the United States of America. The United States of America is a Republic, not a democracy. It is a Country comprised of 50 states, Congress and the Senate are comprised of representatives of those 50 states. Those representatives are elected through a democratic process. Laws are decided by Congress and the Senate and inked by The President. There is a system of checks and balances that outline the path from Bill to law. Executive Order: "United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself." The President does have the power of "Executive order", but it is a "discretionary power" not "absolute power". The Constitution of The United States has no stipulation granting this to the President. Executive Order is a power that certain bodies have "interpreted" from the Constitution. Obama is threatening to use executive order for gun control. He needs to understand that he DOES NOT have absolute power to issue executive orders unchecked. This means that the Supreme Court will likely strike down his Executive Order based on Constitutionality. "Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution". So... In the absence of a federal law State laws prevail, and federal laws are decided by Congress and the Senate. Obama in all of his delusional grandeur has taken it upon him self to try and turn the United States into an Absolute Monarchy/Autocracy. I took an oath on April 27th 1989 to defend this countrys Constitution from enemy's foreign and domestic. I take my oath very seriously and literally. Literally meaning supporting and defending The Constitution. The Constitution of the United States was written to separate the governing of The Republic of The United States from the way other countries are governed, to be an original. There was and still is a GOOD reason for that. “History is a gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville What separates the Framers from Today's politicians? Quite frankly focus. Our Framers were focused on the experiment of creating the greatest nation on the planet and today's politicians are focused on being reelected. “There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville This Nation has become what it is through laziness and weak people. “Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville 2. Every persons opinion on whether the Government is overstepping its boundaries is moot. The Constitution outlines the boundaries. In order to protect all people from the needs of the few there is no room for interpretation. Those who interpret the Constitution loosely are the lazy and unwilling. What I really needed was a "LOVE" button. Make it happen Halo! Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!

Latest Blogs
Hipocrisy in the mainstream media Last Blog: 05-11-2013 By: SmashMouth Rookie free agent Class 2013 Last Blog: 05-08-2013 By: crawgator Upon further review: OLB Eric Martin, Nebraska Last Blog: 04-29-2013 By: hagan714

01-17-2013, 11:25 AM	#17
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort Alabama Posts: 10,975	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions Originally Posted by TheOak I am a strict Constitutionalist. 1. The Federal Government does NOT own the United States of America. The United States of America is a Republic, not a democracy. It is a Country comprised of 50 states, Congress and the Senate are comprised of representatives of those 50 states. Those representatives are elected through a democratic process. Laws are decided by Congress and the Senate and inked by The President. There is a system of checks and balances that outline the path from Bill to law. Executive Order: "United States Presidents issue executive orders to help officers and agencies of the executive branch manage the operations within the federal government itself." The President does have the power of "Executive order", but it is a "discretionary power" not "absolute power". The Constitution of The United States has no stipulation granting this to the President. Executive Order is a power that certain bodies have "interpreted" from the Constitution. Obama is threatening to use executive order for gun control. He needs to understand that he DOES NOT have absolute power to issue executive orders unchecked. This means that the Supreme Court will likely strike down his Executive Order based on Constitutionality. "Supreme Court ruled in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) that Executive Order 10340 from President Harry S. Truman placing all steel mills in the country under federal control was invalid because it attempted to make law, rather than clarify or act to further a law put forth by the Congress or the Constitution". So... In the absence of a federal law State laws prevail, and federal laws are decided by Congress and the Senate. Obama in all of his delusional grandeur has taken it upon him self to try and turn the United States into an Absolute Monarchy/Autocracy. I took an oath on April 27th 1989 to defend this countrys Constitution from enemy's foreign and domestic. I take my oath very seriously and literally. Literally meaning supporting and defending The Constitution. The Constitution of the United States was written to separate the governing of The Republic of The United States from the way other countries are governed, to be an original. There was and still is a GOOD reason for that. “History is a gallery of pictures in which there are few originals and many copies.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville What separates the Framers from Today's politicians? Quite frankly focus. Our Framers were focused on the experiment of creating the greatest nation on the planet and today's politicians are focused on being reelected. “There are many men of principle in both parties in America, but there is no party of principle.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville This Nation has become what it is through laziness and weak people. “Democracy extends the sphere of individual freedom, socialism restricts it. Democracy attaches all possible value to each man; socialism makes each man a mere agent, a mere number. Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: equality. But notice the difference: while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.” ― Alexis de Tocqueville 2. Every persons opinion on whether the Government is overstepping its boundaries is moot. The Constitution outlines the boundaries. In order to protect all people from the needs of the few there is no room for interpretation. Those who interpret the Constitution loosely are the lazy and unwilling. My favorite post of 2013 so far, and there have been many many good one's to choose from. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!

01-17-2013, 12:05 PM	#18
saintfan Site Donor Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 9,541 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions Originally Posted by Crusader Not trying to start an argument here I will say that I personally believe that every persons opinion on wether the government is overstepping its limits will depend on how that person feels about the specific issue. Lets say John supports a ban on guns, he'll probably be ok with the government banning them on account of 'general welfare' while Clark who is opposed the ban will think the government is clearly overreaching its limits. While when the government wants to ban refined sugar for the 'general welfare' since it causes obesity and other health related issues John will be outraged, turns out he is a farmer and grows sugarr canes. Clark on the other hand is a city slicker who eats pretty healthy aleady so this will not affect him in any big way so he is fine with it. This is just a made up example of how I believe people think. You tend to get upset when something affects you but if it doesn't its much easier to just be okay with it. My experience is tha very few people will stick to their priciples if they have something to gain (or a percieved gain) fom straying from them. Ah, but see, that's the problem. Someone's opinion is just that. It's their opinion. John and Clark can go jump in the lake. The Federal Government DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO BAN GUNS. It is FORBIDDEN from this through the Constitution. John and Clark can fight amongst themselves over refined sugar too, because, there again, the Federal Government DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY through the Constitution to ban refined Sugar. The idea behind the Constitution is to manage the thing you mention in your last paragraph. People tend to want what THEY want for their own reasons. That is certainly human nature. The Constitution prevents this corruption - and this is why Amending that document is akin to moving mountains. The Fed has been bastardized through interpretation where none is necessary. See, there are those who see the Constitution as a flawed document (Obama, Pelosi, etc) and they effort daily to undermine it in favor of their own, personal view. Obama doesn't want guns. He will lie, market, manipulate, issue illegal executive orders, and on and on until his agenda is met. This is how we ended up with Obamacare. Precisely how. The Supreme Court, at quite the last minute, had to label it a tax to push it through, even though Obama is on record stating it is not a tax BEFORE it went to the Supreme Court. Ah, but the fix was in. This is not a conspiracy theory. This is a Conspiracy fact. And this is nothing new. It goes back to the Great Depression and even before. The biggest issue is that the liberals have succeeded. The population is at a tipping point. Through social programs enacted by a Government that never had the Constitutional authority to enact them, the Fed now has the numbers to further its agenda. This has been cooking, quite by design, for over a hundred years. Can you see it? This is why people like me are so furious. This is why I can tell liberals to go to hell. Truth be told, most people in America that "I" would call a liberal don't really understand. They don't know their own history. They don't grasp the true brilliance of the Constitution - what the men who wrote it had experienced themselves and what they were so eloquently trying to avoid. So these people think they have some kind of 'better way'. There is no history of it. In fact the policies they support are known to fail by those of us who actually take the time to explore them beyond the "hey, that's a good idea" point. We are not arbitrarily bashing Obama. We see what's going on. He's not the devil. He's just the most recent demon. There have been many who came before him. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook! Danno and TheOak like this.
	Trust in Allah, but tie up your camel... Last edited by saintfan; 01-17-2013 at 12:15 PM..

01-17-2013, 12:48 PM	#19
TheOak Site Donor Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 7,631	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions What liberals and the remainder of the world process/practice is not Utopia, it is hypocrisy. The liberal mindset - People do not have the capacity to make decisions for them selves to the Government must do it. Government = People. See the flaw in that plan? The Government people should decide what healthcare the people get, the Government people do not have to use the same healthcare that the people do. FactCheck.org : Health Care for Members of Congress? People should drive fuel efficient vehicles. The Government people travel in motorcades of armor plated 9 MPG Suburbans, and fly 10 people to a 747. File:Barack Obama's presidential motorcade en route to Camp Victory 4-7-09 2.JPG - Wikimedia Commons People cant decide whether they own guns, who do they need protection from... The Government that is protected by guns should decide that. Obama Signs Law Giving Himself Armed Guards for Life Only Law Enforcement and Military should posses guns - How is that working out? Nidal Malik Hasan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia People shouldn't decide what food they consume... The government people should decide that.... Obama’s pre-debate meal: Steak and potatoes American People live a life of excess, the Government is who should dictate moderation. PLEASE explain this one to me. 54 Christmas trees in White House The Government has decided that the American People are not on control of their debt, guns, diet, healthcare, or spending... The Government practices absolutely ZERO self-restraint in any of the fore mentioned items. The out and out travesty is they DO NOT do any of this with THEIR OWN money. So, in regards to our Hypocritical Government and those blind hypocrites that support them and believe they have our best interest... Have a hearty F-U, and stay out of mu business. I have no criminal record. What does all of the regulation breed? Ignorant, weak, vulnerable drones. Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook! saintfan and Danno like this.
	You should expect some in my replies. Last edited by TheOak; 01-17-2013 at 01:11 PM..

01-17-2013, 12:58 PM	#20
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort Alabama Posts: 10,975	Re: Texas: JAIL Any Federal Officials Trying to Enforce New Gun Restrictions Oak is on fire!!! Share Share this post on Digg Reddit! Twitter! Facebook!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode