[KalashnikovJosh]

Originally Posted by bkt

As I understand it and for the most part, yes. As long as they aren't violating some part of the Constitution, they're fine.

Ahh,but alas!

So many 'experts' these days say that 'the supremacy clause means all federal law is supreme'.They were bleating it all over the TV when the states sued the feds over the health care scam.They dont bother to mention the part about how the federal law needs to abide by the Constitution,cause if it doesnt-its illegitimate......which is EXACTLY what the health care scam is.

I noticed you mentioned 'nullification'.

Are you an 'evil tenther'?

[bkt]

Are these the same "experts" who are routinely surprised or shocked at the news, whether pertaining to monetary, economic, employment, polling or other issues?

Anyone who says all Federal law is supreme is an idiot. Laws get knocked down as unconstitutional all the time. And these days, we're seeing a bunch of states contest Federal law because that law oversteps the bounds of the Federal government as defined by the Constitution. That's good! These will end up in court, and here's to hoping the courts side with the states.

Yes, I'm an evil "tenther" insofar as I acknowledge what it says and its importance, but I don't know the secret handshake or anything.

[KalashnikovJosh]

Theres a secret handshake?

The 'experts' I speak of are the ones that those particular 'experts' you mention called on to explain the 'legitimacy' of the federal government taking it upon itself to grant itself the authority to order us all to buy a product or face financial penalties.

And yes,they are idiots.They call themselves 'Constitutional experts',despite the irony that they dont seem to understand the Constitution.

And yes,despite the intentionally fostered association between nullification and the Civil War(and how it was fought over slavery),the states are nullifying certain out of bounds federal laws,just like they nullified the fugitive slave act.

And its about time.

[robocop10mm]

Don't all international Treaties have to be ratified by a 2/3 majority of Congress? So what if Hitlery signed it. Her signature means diddly squat. So what if Dumbo signs it. If Congress does not pass it, it is dead.

[Last Crow]

Originally Posted by robocop10mm

Don't all international Treaties have to be ratified by a 2/3 majority of Congress? So what if Hitlery signed it. Her signature means diddly squat. So what if Dumbo signs it. If Congress does not pass it, it is dead.

That’s what it says on the US Senate web site. That would be 67 votes for passage, I don’t think that will happen.
U.S. Senate: Art & History Home > Origins & Development > Powers & Procedures > Treaties

[KalashnikovJosh]

Originally Posted by robocop10mm

Don't all international Treaties have to be ratified by a 2/3 majority of Congress? So what if Hitlery signed it. Her signature means diddly squat. So what if Dumbo signs it. If Congress does not pass it, it is dead.

Yeah but Hitlery is a 'modern progressive'.

That means she knows whats best for everyone.

She doesnt need to follow the law that limits her sharing her gift of benevolent greatness with the world.

(I'm going to go puke now,see you folks tomorrow.)

[alsaqr]

While you were watching the oil spill, the New York failed terrorist bombing and other critical crises, Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the UN

Total bull$hit. There is no such treaty at present. No such treaty will even exist before at least 2012. The proposed treaty is not about gun control in the US. The UN has no such jurisdiction in the US or any other country. That is stated in a UN resolution.

International Gun Ban Treaty? | FactCheck.org

UN General Assembly Resolution A/C.1/64/L.38/Rev.1, Oct. 28: …Acknowledging also the right of States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through national constitutional protections on private ownership, exclusively within their territory…

It really does sadden me that folks buy into lies, distortions and demagoguery without ever attempting to find out the truth of the matter. This crap is being kept alive by the gunshow promotors, ammo distributors and others who have a vested interest in keeping gun and ammo prices high.

[IGETEVEN]

Originally Posted by alsaqr

Total bull$hit.

It really does sadden me that folks buy into lies, distortions and demagoguery without ever attempting to find out the truth of the matter. This crap is being kept alive by the gun show promoters, ammo distributors and others who have a vested interest in keeping gun and ammo prices high.

Indeed.

"Propaganda is neutrally defined as a systematic form of purposeful persuasion that attempts to influence the emotions, attitudes, opinions, and actions of specified target audiences for ideological, political or commercial purposes through the controlled transmission of one-sided messages (which may or may not be factual) via mass and direct media channels."

Richard Alan Nelson

Jack

[KalashnikovJosh]

I dont buy into the hype of lies.

I do however ascribe fully to the belief that there are people in this country who want to disarm the populace to make them more easily 'dealt with'.

They are called "Socialist Progressives".They ascribe to Marxist and Communist ideology,and rather than attempting to violently overthrow the Republic as is their usual modus operandi,they have been diligently working for decades to 'progressively' bring us to socialism by abusing interpretations of government power-by rotting the body politic from within,as Cicero put it.

Conspiracy theory?

I think not-given the history of the Socialist Progressive movement in America who deem it necessary to implement what they believe is right for everyone else including such programs and ideology as social equality,welfare,GUN CONTROL,environmentalism, and last but definitely not the least of their evils-EUGENICS,its not hard at all to come to the conclusion that they would want to take total control of the use of force and place it under a large,powerful central government that they can then use to implement their policy and ideology.
After all-they know they cant get away with murder if the victims are armed.

And I dont underestimate evil.

They will use anything they can to implement their agendas.

Including the UN.

And Hitlery is a self-described "Modern Progressive".

Do I believe this particular report?
I'm not going to discount it-I'll keep my eye on it.But it hasn't happened yet.

And it does seem a bit far fetched.(Unless you understand the history of the Socialist Progressives in America.)

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear."
-Marcus Tullius Cicero 42B.C.

[orangello]

That could cut down on the target shooting fun, but would it really matter in a self defense situation? It wouldn't to me, though i would be more careful to wear gloves when loading mags.

At one point in my life "Legal" meant right, good, correct, proper, acceptable, now "Legal" just means government-approved and simpler. (Just my opinion, not representative of this forum or any other members) When it comes down to it, i believe that most people in this country will choose what is "right" or "good" rather than what is "legal".