hr 822 or he 2900....stop the BS - Page 4
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 46

Thread: hr 822 or he 2900....stop the BS

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    States have powers..not rights.
    The powers are established through the BILL OF RIGHTS. The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791. It states the Constitution's principle of federalism by providing that powers not granted to the federal government nor prohibited to the states by the Constitution are reserved, respectively, to the states or the people. This is the RIGHT of the state.

    Congress cannot directly compel states to enforce federal regulations which is the basis of the states' suit against obamacare... it violates the right of the states as granted through consitional amendment.

    The Tenth Amendment is similar to an earlier provision of the Articles of Confederation: "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and RIGHT, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled." With an authorized power comes the right to exercise it freely. (SOURCE: Yale Law School Avalon Project - "Articles of Confederation from Yale University")
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  2.   
  3. #32
    The argument has already been made and well documented that the Interstate Commerce clause is the underlying support for H.R. 822 in the wake of Chicago v. McDonald. I'd like to see New York, Kalifornication, and Joisy try to reverse what limited pieces of ship legislation they're currently enforcing. I think you'd see a citizen revolt. The tide is in our favor. The clear majority of voting populace want less gun control, less government intrusion, and less restriction on travel.
    "The 2nd amendment was never intended to allow private citizens to 'keep and bear arms'. If it had, there would have been wording such as 'the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed'." -- Ken Konecki on Usenet, on 27 Jul 1992

  4. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    State of Confusion
    Posts
    7,733
    Quote Originally Posted by weekendskp View Post
    The argument has already been made and well documented that the Interstate Commerce clause is the underlying support for H.R. 822 in the wake of Chicago v. McDonald. I'd like to see New York, Kalifornication, and Joisy try to reverse what limited pieces of ship legislation they're currently enforcing. I think you'd see a citizen revolt. The tide is in our favor. The clear majority of voting populace want less gun control, less government intrusion, and less restriction on travel.
    As a NY resident I'm ashamed that this state will not recofnize any other state permit. A man's good character does not change just because he crossed a state line.
    GOD, GUNS and GUITARS

  5. NY state can't even get it right as far as there own CC license. Meaning each county can set there own "rules". Some are restricted some are not. I am all for unrestricted myself.

  6. #35
    My big problem with HR822 is it uses the Interstate Commerce argument under the 14th Amendment, not the Second Amendment.

    And the problem with this is, once you set the legal precedent that the right to bear arms is a commerce issue, we'll be pretty much screwed in the future.

    Commerce is not an inalienable right. In my opinion HR822 will further dumb down future generations via incremental historical revisionism.

    MICHELLE OBAMA: "Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."

    I believe her and all like her when they speak. Their words betray them.

    I don't let their ambiguous words or any HR Bill more than a paragraph be a blank canvas for me to project my hopes and dreams on to.

    This can be twisted any way they want in a generation and we won't be around to notice.

    I have to stand with the GOA and JPFO on this one.

  7. #36
    Uniform Commercial Code is what is at the heart of HR822 not common law. It create a juristrictional issue which will cloud the issue's.Uniform Commercial Code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. do some reshearch and you will find that most laws are based on this instrument. Your out is UCC 1-207/1-308.
    The Only Easy Day Was Yesterday

  8. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by maybejim View Post
    I think this is a Constitutional issue not a States Rights issue. There are several reasons within the Constitution that all CC licenses should be recognized everywhere. Actually there is one big reason why the requirement for a license at all is unconstitutional but we need to take back our 2nd Amendment Rights like they were lost, a little bit at a time.
    The Second Amendment does not say everybody can have a gun. It says the Congress of the United states can't pass a law saying you can't have a gun. The Second Amendment doesn't give you rights, it says Congress can't take away rights you already have. We have the right to have a gun, we just need to keep using the Second Amendment to keep the government from infringing on that right. A whole lot different perspective.
    Retired Marine, Retired School Teacher,Independent Voter, Goldwater Conservative.

  9. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Redding, CA.
    Posts
    11

    Hr822

    Does any one know when the senate is going to vote on it?
    Last edited by kardar2; 12-06-2011 at 11:51 PM. Reason: when
    All you need for happiness is a good gun, a good horse, and a good wife.
    Daniel Boone

  10. #39
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Houston Metro Area, Texas
    Posts
    3,004
    The second amendment as well as all the rest is protect us from the Gov.

  11. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by kardar2 View Post
    Does any one know when the senate is going to vote on it?
    It presently resides in a Senate committee. This means that before any vote the committee will have to "vote" on it. I say "vote" because there are several things that can happen to the bill while in the committee's hands.

    It can be brought up and if recommended it will be returned to the full Senate for a vote.
    It can be brought up and returned to the full Senate with recommended amendments.
    It can be returned to the full Senate with a recommendation not to pass.
    It can simply be ignored and left to die (the action taken on most bills).

    There is no schedule that I have heard for any action to be taken so the only thing we can do is notify our Senators and the committee members that we want action on the bill. Otherwise it will die in committee with no action ever taken.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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