Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?  (Read 9323 times)


  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 323
    • Murray Computer Science Group
Re: Gun Laws:(or Rather, a lack there of) Improving in New Hampshire?
« Reply #30 on: October 04, 2005, 11:19:57 am »

I have been studying the US Constitution and a myriad of supreme court rulings, How in ANY judges right mind could the POSSIBLY EVEN CONSIDER making a rulling in the affirmitve for Gun Band, the Brady Bill or anything similiar?

The 2nd ammendment is VERY specific!

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

To my understanding it should be read like this.

"Since the people may need a militia (a bunch of people, who are not in the state or fedreal military) they have the right to keep guns and to carry guns and practice their aim, and congress had best not make a single law concerning the ownership of guns or the formation of militias, since one day the people may need to defend it against foreighn invaders or it's very own government, being as we the founders had to fight our own government, which outlawed the ownership of guns or passed laws on who and who couldn't own em, and whhat type. Just so we could live free from tyranny."

Congress has ignored THIS ammendment

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

In other words: When considering the meaning of the constitution: Leave the people's rights alone!

Many people should remember WHY the bills of rights was added to The Constitution. The founding fathers felt and many delegates felt that the constitution as it was written would open the way for tyranny by the central government. Many of our forefathers said they would not adopt the Constitution UNLESS the bill of rights was added! So what is more important, the bill of rights or the constitution... I would say the Bill of Rights because without it we would have NEVER even got off the ground floor as a nation.

The Bill of Rights is the power of the people and the FedGov keeps INFRINGING and MAKING LAWS CONCENING those rights.

According to

in·fringe ( P )  Pronunciation Key  (n-frnj)
v. in·fringed, in·fring·ing, in·fring·es
v. tr.

   1. To transgress or exceed the limits of; violate: infringe a contract; infringe a patent.
   2. Obsolete. To defeat; invalidate.

Is the FedGov trying to make YOUR rights obsolete? To Defeat them? To invalidate them?

Damn Skippy.

Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up