That may all be true, but he made a statement towards someones character as fact. He was asked to back it up. He was also asked a simple question that all was required was a yes/no response. And he chose not to respond to either.Just a simple, easily observed, fact for those who might be interested. 27 of the 100 posts in this thread, prior to this above one, were from FreedomVA. He has been making valuable contributions to this discussion.
And, while I don’t agree with him on everything, I thank him for his contributions to a lively discussion. He adds, does not detract, value.
I would enjoy your thoughts on the below article. I have preaching this for years. Maybe some are waking up.In reality the 4A doesn't exist in large part anymore for the average citizen. Destroyed using the "drug war " and " officer safety" as excuses. At least not as it was intended when written.
The 2a factually has ceased to exist long ago. What we have now in every state is different levels of gov permission as to what we may own and carry, when , where, and most places a fee must be paid.
The 1A is rapidly going the same route with the advent of " hate speech ". Which basically means whatever the offended group of the day wants it to mean.
Voting hasn't and won't change our decline in these areas to any great extent.
My own personal take is there are only two constitutional avenues that will. A article 5 convention of states , or massive civil disobedience and the hell that comes with that.
My preference, and I'm aware intelligent people disagree would be trying the former first.
Something must be done though or we will be a full on socialist country inside of a decade.
I would enjoy your thoughts on the below article. I have preaching this for years. Maybe some are waking up.
The Supreme Court Is Not The Final Say On The Constitution
That may all be true, but he made a statement towards someones character as fact. He was asked to back it up. He was also asked a simple question that all was required was a yes/no response. And he chose not to respond to either.
Correct....That's why it's call the "Bill of Right" as much as sleeping, eating, taking a dump, ect.......and not "Bill of Privileges" or "Bill of Selective Wordings".I'm not a very educated person in many ways. But the Constitution was written in plain English for the common man to understand.
Courts and politicians have inserted entire phrases into that document that were pulled out of thin air. Twisting and convoluting it until they, the courts , lawyers (no offense to present company) and politicians see themselves as the only entities that can understand it. As though it was,written in some mysterious code .
My take, not only of SCOTUS, but Congress and the POTUS , is that once they step an inch outside the COTUS, as written , or as constitutionally amended by proper constitutional process, they are violating the law of the land. Their unconstitutional decrees are null and void.
The fact they hire mercenaries willing to use force to enforce those null and void decrees does not make those laws or court decisions constitutional. They are criminals who should be removed from office and prosecuted.
Precedence is simply upholding in many cases , one bad decision by pointing to an earlier bad decision.
In a nutshell, the COTUS is the law of the land. Once ANY branch of gov steps outside its constraints they are breaking the law of the land and the perpetrators should be prosecuted. Congressman ,President , Judge ,or Cop.
So you're going back to rolodex, typewriters and index cards? It's not just social media, it's everything you do digitally, from anywhere from any digital devices, behind your backs, without you even knowing about it.The data breach Solus mentioned is one of the reasons I have never used FB, etc. I don't believe ANY of those companies can keep their data safe forever. The same goes for these DNA ancestry searchers.
There is so little personal privacy left, I try to keep as much as I can.
Not trying to be disrespectful here, sir.Young man, I have no idea where you got that idea. I asked you a simple question, have you ever been prosecuted for a jailable offense? And, you have chosen to ignore answering. Why I don't know. It must be a sore spot. Or, you are not the warrior you claim to be.
So, I will ask you a more poignant question, have you ever been prosecuted for a jailable offense in regards to exercising your second amendment right? My original question did not ask for details, it just asked a yes/no question.
I suggest you do a little research before making such proclamations. I'll wait for your results.
Terry vs. Ohio, i don't see it as a 4th violation, Officer has a reasonable suspicion when the suspects were peeking into the store 24x before the office made his approached. If i was a LEO i would have investigated the situation also for "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activities.Terry v. Ohio destroyed the 4A, Heien buttresses Terry. I f Terry were to fall the 4A would be restored.