2nd Amend not Individual Right - Page 4
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43

Thread: 2nd Amend not Individual Right

  1. #31


    Here is the latest and greatest as posted on AR15.com:

    update from George Young

    Well, this is the update.

    The hearing for the County of Hawaii in their Motion to Dismiss was scheduled for November 13, 2007, however, it was canceled and consolidated with the State's Motion to Dismiss which was scheduled for November 19, 2007.

    Now, since I submitted a Motion in Opposition to Dismissal, and literally took apart their claim to State sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment, Chief Judge Helen Gilmore (a Clinton appointee), has canceled the court date of November 19, 2007. Judge Gilmore has decided to exercise Hawaii State Local Rule 7.2 (d): "A Court, in its discretion, can rule on any motion without a hearing."

    In other words, the Complaint is now in a position of being denied a hearing or even going to court. What this action implies is that any challenge to any Right under the Bill of Rights, in Hawaii, can be suppressed through LOCAL RULES. The Defendants do not want to go to court with this issue. They have no protection behind the Eleventh Amendment. They do not possess any evidence or proof of the "Collective Right" from the period Dec. 15, 1791 through 1900. And, I have turned down "Declaratory Judgement" (leave the decision to a single Judge). The Democrats have resorted to LOCAL RULES.

    First Amendment Right to "...address government for grievances", is now in a position of being denied. A despotic government is now in place. The rule of law no longer prevails.

    The State claim to the Second Amendment and the "collective right", alters the Hawaii State Constitution and Article 17, "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.". In 1959, the Hawaii State Constitutional Convention, in order to join the Union and become a State, passed Article 17 under the foundation and belief that it is an individual right. Therefore, we now have a constitutional change without the permission of "We the people...". In this instance, we are no longer a democracy with a "republican form of government" and a Citizen; we are now a democracy with a "democratic form of government" and a Subject. The difference is that in a democratic form of government, like Japan, Great Britain, Venezuela, etc., the legislature can change their constitutions without the participation of the people. The United States is the only government in the world that is a republican form of government, where the people's document is supreme and above both the national and local governments. Our constitutions, both national and state, require an explicit act by "we the people..." in order for it to be altered, changed or abolished. This glaring fact is guaranteed in United States Constitution, Article IV, Section 4: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican form of government." In support of this fact, we have United States Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2: "...under the Authority of the United States, shall be the Supreme Law of the Land; and the JUDGES in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."

    I have not yet received the court's written order yet on their decision as to whether to proceed with trial or not, who knows, I may be surprised and Judge Gilmore will grant the trial, but don't hold your breath.

    It is a shame that Hawaii is now the prime experimental base for socialism and the people of Hawaii are ignorant of the that fact.

    "...For the very idea that one man may be compelled to hold his life, or the means of living, or any material right essential to the enjoyment of life at the mere will of another, seems to be intolerable in any country where freedom prevails, as being the essence of slavery itself." (Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)).

    George Young

  3. #32
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    NE Portland, Oregon - PacNW


    Quote Originally Posted by Musashi View Post
    Here is the latest and greatest as posted on AR15.com:



    Has the Second Amendment Foundation and the NRA been apprised of this? Has either of them offered any support?

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Honolulu, HI & Salt Lake City, UT
    any updates on this case?

  5. #34
    Haven't heard anything yet. I've been watchin on AR15.com about this also and no updates. Let's just say, "After living here in Hawaii for awhile, i don't put my faith into the judicial system." Still keeping my fingers crossed!!!!

  6. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Arapahoe County CO
    Quote Originally Posted by rabywk View Post
    ...the Second Amendment guarantees a "collective" rather than an individual right.
    Well, McDonald has destroyed that argument. Anything still going on with your case?

  7. Quote Originally Posted by Anubis View Post
    Well, McDonald has destroyed that argument. Anything still going on with your case?
    Both Heller and McDonald. I can't believe the crap that states like these try to pull.

  8. #37
    We need a national concealed carry program good in all states. Then these damn libtards wouldn't be able to trample the rights of law abiding citizens!

  9. I can't understand why anyone would want to live there. Traffic is horrendous on the main Isle. And now the government is engaged in communist, socialist rule?

    Another vacation spot nixed from my bucket list...
    I'm a firm believer in two term limits for all politicians; one in office, the other in prison.

  10. #39
    So all the other amendments are about individual rights but for some magical reason the second is not? And how could any militia be formed if the individuals forming it didn't have a right to keep and bear arms?

    This fails the basic "can a 6 year old figure it out" logic test.
    Knarren und Zigarren!!!

  11. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Quote Originally Posted by MuleSkinner View Post
    We need a national concealed carry program good in all states. Then these damn libtards wouldn't be able to trample the rights of law abiding citizens!

    We do not need any such thing! Wanting the Federal government to be the one in charge of a program that delegates how/when we are allowed to carry will be the biggest infringement on our rights. Tell me how the Federal government will appease all the states with this "program". Will the program be Constitutional carry where all people who can get a firearm can carry it anyway they choose? Or will it be like NY or NJ or MD or CA or HI just to name a few of the biggest usurpers of our rights?

    We will all get hosed if the Federal government takes over in delegating a national reciprocity program.

    What we need is strong representation of all the "we the people" in every state to take back our rights that have been stolen from the corrupt state officials.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts