It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: greencmp
a reply to: eisegesis
"The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
originally posted by: EternalSolace
Here's a link to all the cosponsors of the bill if anyone is interested. I found one senator from my state. Unfortunately they're not in my district...
Cosponsors: H.R.4269 — 114th Congress (2015-2016)
To regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes.
After the supreme court refused to hear France v US, an assault weapons ban case in Chicago, your "unlimited" guns rights have never been more at stake. And nobody is talking it.
We know they can read the 14th amendment that says the STATE shall not make or enforce ANY laws that abridge the rights of one group over another.
Meaning apparently the Anti gunners think they are MORE equal than the pro gunners.
Amendment II 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.
Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
That argument was proven fallacious long ago. As have others.
originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: Phage
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of Constitutional law if you believe that the SCOTUS, or congress have that kind of authority.
Yes. That's right.
nor is it the role of the SCOTUS to interpret the Constitution, but to place Constitutional scrutiny upon the laws of the Congress and certain actions of the Executive.