National Concealed Carry Law possible?
It appears that Senator Tom Coburn’s (R-OK) proclivity towards introducing conservative amendments to unrelated bills may be catching on.
According to OpenCongress.com, gay rights groups like the Log Cabin Republicans have been trying to buy Senate Republican support for the Matthew Sheppard Hate Crimes Act by floating the idea of tacking on the National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act to the bill.
From the Washington Independent:
One month after successfully tucking an amendment into the credit card reform bill that expanded gun rights, a small number of Senate Republicans are looking at the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act as another chance to score a victory for the Second Amendment. The possible plan — to add an amendment that would allow gun owners to carry their weapons from one state to another in accordance with concealed carry laws. The possible rationale — to defend gay rights.
“It makes sense for a group of people who would be protected by hate crime legislation to support something that would let them defend themselves before or after the crime,” said one Republican Senate aid familiar with the discussions. “It’s relevant, and we want to work together with gay groups to get the message out.”
While the aide described the discussions over a gun rights amendment to the hate crimes bill as “very fluid,” conservative and pro-gun rights gay groups outside of the Senate are ready to make a real push for it. GOProud, a new gay rights group that broke away from the Log Cabin Republicans in April, has talked with top staffers for Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) about how to make the civil rights case for conceal and carry reciprocity.
“We support this because we think it’s advantageous to make it legal and relatively easy for gay people to arm themselves so they can protect themselves,” said Jimmy LaSilva, who became the executive director of GOProud after three years working on policy for the Log Cabin Republicans. “In the next few weeks we want to start highlighting some of those stories. There are people who have averted gay bashings because of their ability to use guns.”
The argument goes that protecting gays from hate crimes begins with their own ability to defend themselves. This strategy could have some very real — and negative — consequences for gun owners. If the federal government sets the standard for when and where to carry a gun, then state laws governing the issuance of permits will be next on the chopping block.
I can see a liberal appellate court legislating from the bench and requiring that all states comply with a Federally mandated standard for issuing a permit. Such a Federal mandate would no doubt include an excessive and draconian waiting period, expensive and impractical training requirements, and exorbitant fees. Federal overreaching of this type could effectively neuter all current state CCW laws.
Additionally, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 does nothing for residents of states that don’t already issue permits. It’s great that I, as a Colorado resident, could carry in Massachusetts under this law, but a Massachusetts resident could not carry here in Colorado, because Massachusetts permits are virtually impossible to get.
Vermont, for all its liberal tenancies, continues to have the best concealed weapon law in the country. In Vermont, if you are legally allowed to own a gun, then you have the right to carry that weapon concealed without “Government permission.”
Any national attempts to reform the concealed carry law should be geared toward a national Vermont-style or Alaska-style law, which is based on true freedom.
I live in California and I can not get a CCW in this state but If HR 197 Passes I will be allowed to carry in California. WHY do you ask!! because I have a permit to carry concealed in Utah and 29 other states actually 30 because I have a Florida permit also.
Regarding your comment: Additionally, the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 does nothing for residents of states that don’t already issue permits. It’s great that I, as a Colorado resident could under this law, carry in Massachusetts, but a Massachusetts resident could not carry here in Colorado, because Massachusetts permits are virtually impossible to get.
YOU CAN GET A CCW FROM UTAH(you do not need to be a Utah resident, just take the class and pass the background)that allows you to carry in 30 states and with that permit if HR 197 passes you would be allowed to carry in your own state even Massachusetts. By the way once you have a Utah CCW you can get a Florida CCW bringing the total to 31 one states. As it stands now, I as a California resident with a Utah CCW I can carry in 31 states but not my own state. Isn’t that ridiculous?
A reading of the text of the National Right-to-Carry Act does not include provision or coverage for people like yourself, whose state of residence does not issue permits.
The language of the legislation only refers to citizens who have permits issued by their state of residence. I do not believe this legislation would allow you (as a California resident with a non-resident permit) to carry in all 50 states.
The precedent that this kind of legislations sets will have very bad consequences for gun rights in the long term even if there is a short term benefit for some gun owners in gun-hostile states. Once the Federal Government takes control of concealed carry laws, they’re essentially free to put any restrictions they please on obtaining a concealed carry license. We would end up with a national policy that looks like Massachusetts’, rather than one that looks like Vermont’s.
Setting aside the practical aspects of this legislation, it’s also blatantly unconstitutional and deleterious from a states rights point of view.
I’m not so sure, Don. Yes, it is ridiculous (and awesome) that you could carry in 31 states, but it’s the manner in which you acquire that ability that’s worrisome.
We’re talking about the federal government’s subsuming all state laws (many of which are good) under their own umbrella. We’re talking about standardizing and regimenting gun laws for all fifty states at once.
Sure, this bill doesn’t prescribe a set litany of regulations or standards for all fifty states to adopt right now, but it paves the way for a future bill or judge to use the framework/foundation that this bill creates (i.e., of the feds’ being able to overturn individual state laws and subject the whole nation to their own gun rights dictates) to do just that a few years down the line.
This bill may look cool, but it’s actually pretty dangerous. I’m very wary about this kind of “gun rights” bill. It’s also pure NRA. (In other words: It’s a no go on the sniff test.)
Also, does anyone know anything about whether this amendment would do anything for you if you’re a non-resident CCW? I’ve heard you have to be a resident in the state that granted you the permit in order to get anything out of this bill in the first place. Is that true?
To Don and others-
Here is the full text of the bill, for reference: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-197
HR 197, and any other Federal CCW legislation should be vigorously opposed for the following reasons:
1- Primarily, it’s a bad law. It’s written very broadly, and as such could potentially be open to various interpretations in various courts for years to come.
2- Secondly, the legislation would probably weaken the already excellent gun laws in states such as AK, NH, VT, and etc. As a citizen of NH, I could not support any law that would debilitate my ability to carry almost everywhere in NH and 20 other States without fingerprints, prohibitively expensive fees (NH is $10 for 10 years), photographs on my CCW license, or list of guns on my CCW license.
3- Thirdly, the legislation does not seem like it will accomplish what its supporters would hope to achieve, which is a national CCW that would let a person of any State carry a concealed firearm in any other State. As NAGR Staff pointed out in the post above, you can see from a cursory review of the bill that there are already several “gotchya” clauses, such as the first sentence of the language that would be changed: “Notwithstanding any provision of the law of any State or political subdivision thereof”…
4- Finally, this bill is DANGEROUS and should be OPPOSED because it would pave the way for NATIONAL PISTOL REGISTRATION, and as history has shown, NATIONAL FIREARMS REGISTRATION LEADS TO CONFISCATION OF FIREARMS. It is for this reason alone that HR 197 should be vigorously opposed by any firearm owner of conscience.
A preferable solution would be to have legislation or a Supreme Court decision that struck down the ability of States to prohibit issuing CCW licenses, and then find a way to mandate CCW reciprocity across State lines, respecting minor local restrictions (for example, NH allows CCW holders to carry in schools, VA does not.)
A person would only support this legislation if they supported national firearm registration and national firearm confiscation!
Semper Vigilantes
Andy in NH
[...] indicate that a national concealed carry law may be in the works as Senate Republicans work with the gay [...]
Wayne LaPierre is GAY too. No wonder he’s raping gun owners with this thought control garbage.
I can’t see this ever coming to fruition. They’re trying to scale back gun laws not make it easier to carry them. Not that I’m against it, I just don’t see it happening.
The article is usefull for me. I’ll be coming back to your blog.
Paperwork, fees, photgraphs, fingerprints, and background checks to allow people to carry a side-arm? What kind of nonsense is this?
The right of self-defense is a corollary to the right to life; to deny one is to deny the other. The purpose of government is to insure our rights, not to infringe on them.
The fact is that governments should not be involved in permitting the carriage of weapons, either openly or concealed, by anyone.
Our constitution states that the right of the people to keep (possess) and bear (carry) arms shall not be infringed. Marbury v. Madison (1803) decided that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that any law that contradicts the Constitution is null and void. “The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it; an unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed … An unconstitutional law is void.” (16 American Jurisprudence 2d, Sec. 178)
In Murdock v. Pennsylvania (1943) the Supreme Court stated that a constitutionally-protected right may not be licensed, nor a fee charged. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of those protected natural rights.
In Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham, Alabama (1962) the Supreme Court decided that “If the state does convert a liberty into a privilege, the citizen can engage in the right with impunity.” (That means they can’t punish you, folks!)
To paraphrase an oft-quoted movie line, “Permits? We don’ need no steenking permits!”
I’m glad to see that, unlike the NRA, you’re hesitant to jump in bed and cuddle with gay rights groups and institutional gun lobbyists to pass a bill that — no matter how attractive it looks on the outside — poses so much potential danger to gun owners.
Wayne LaPierre’s lackeys may think this is a cute move, but I’m glad to see that ya’ll aren’t falling for this sirens’ call. This is all just a trick to make us choose between free speech and guns — and yet the consolation prize they offer promises only tyranny.
b Hodges
Atlanta, GA
according to the Constitution we have a right to bear arms. YET THEIR ARE THESE PEOPLE WHO BLAME EVERYTHING ON GUNS, & WANT TO TAKE THAT RIGHT AWAY. WHAT THEY DON’T REALIZE, IS THE PEOPLE WHO USE GUNS ILLEGALLY WILL STILL HAVE GUNS NO MATTER WHAT, & THE REST OF THE LAW ABIDING CITIZENS WILL BE LEFT AT THEIR MERCY. MORE IMPORTANT THAN ANYTHING ELSE, WE NEED TERM LIMITS TO STOP PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN IN CONGRESS FOR YEARS, FROM HAVING SO MUCH POWER. IT IS SAD TO SAY, BUT THEY ARE INTERESTED ONLY IN POWER, MONEY, & WHATEVER WILL GET THEM VOTES.
Absolutely we do NOT want any kind of federal participation. This should be a no brainer except to those who believe that the nanny on the potomac does good. No way do we want any kind of federal fingers on any kind of gun laws, rules, regs, whatever. Get real folks. Think US Postal Service run amok.
I don’t want the goverment in my life PERIOD!!!
There have been attempts to pass term limits for years but, remember who has to pass such bills. The very people we are trying to get OUT of office are NOT going to pass such regulations. Now to address H.R. 197; the sheeple within our country are going to have to stand up on their own hind legs and make their voices [herd]around the country, to their politicians, both local/state, and national with polls, e-mails, letters to the editor and any other way they can think of; very loudly, very clearly! Talk radio is a great way to get things grought out to tens of thousands to millions of listeners. Be calm, polite and have facts to back up whatever you say; if you can get on a local talk program, do so and be ready to answer any questions presented to you. If you don’t know an answer, get the persons info. and find the answer, then contact that person. You may well have made a convert. We have to stop preaching to choir, ie ourselves; we must reach the fence-sitters and convince them of what we say is truth. Always remember, when rights become privileges, they can be taken away! Aim Right-Shoot Straight-&-LIVE with HONOR & INTEGRITY.
Lies, Lies, Lies. I don’t trust this current administration (nor the last one). All they’ve done is spend and take. Anyone who thinks Obama or his croneys are even marginally pro-gun have a great waking up morning coming. So many of the politicians now in office would love to see all guns go away. (except their own of course) That would make us subjects, not citizens. The subjects of a totalitarian government. I think it’s time to clean house in Washington. Term limits are a must to even begin to get things back on track.
Don’t accept the candy… If we do, then they have us.
Citizens have guns. Slaves do not. Citizens have guns to not become slaves. Every gun law is a bad one. Citizens should have the right to own, and carry a gun with no Federal intervention. Gun laws will be attacked forever. Ms. T. V. personality “What’s Her Name”, with a microphone and a LOUD mouth forum, made a blatant, blind sided attack on Tom Selleck on her T.V. show, and blasted citizens owning guns, UNTIL it was discovered that her BODY GUARDS had them to PROTECT her, and her children. It was okay, by her “thinking standards”, for HER to be protected by guns, but not us “ordinary” citizens who have to PROTECT ourselves, and our children. The elite and the government want the right to be protected by guns, but don’t want the peon citizenry to be able to protect themselves. Double standards abound in this current administration. Ergo all gun owners need to get behind the National Gun Rights Assn. and let our voices be heard ALWAYS, and in LOUD numbers. The people who think guns kill, vs it is people who kill, will have to outlaw knives, bats, bricks, etc. if the citizenry of this country acts on that line of thinking. What next, cars? After all, there was a lady in Texas who ran over her dentist husband several times, using her car as a weapon, and that is not the only case of a car being used as a weapon. I am sick to death with the Feds thinking they need to control our guns. I haven’t had a problem controlling mine. I don’t need the Feds controlling anything in my life, ever. They already sap the life blood out of our checks for Social Security, which by the way is TAXED as income, after WE paid it in. Sooner or later, the Feds will find a way to tax us every year for even owning a gun. Bottom line is that we have a right to own a gun with no Federal intervention. I’m watching them like a hawk. I will not vote for ANY of them who even show the tiniest interest in messing with our guns.
What folks don’t understand is that they have to view such proposals with the question “What will this do for THEM? The answer is that the states will have given up another States Right. Those who fall for such ploys are being fooled into giving away their LIBERTY to those who would otherwise attempt to STEAL it. NOTHING is beneath them. “Covet not peace that Freedom is lost”.
‘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.’
Requiring any type of permit, license or any requirement to carry a weapon is an infringement of your Second Amendment Right.
The sooner this is brought before the Unites States Supreme Court the better. The Second Amendment is clear. I can KEEP and BEAR arms without INFRINGEMENT.
Free-er Gun Rights?
Don’t make laugh.
They even want your pocket knife!
http://www.kniferights.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=1
This is NOT Bogus!
And we only have til the 21st of JUNE to make a coment on the US Customs site.
Did any get any notification of the from the Government?
Don’t bother to answer, we already know.
So while we fight over Gays and Marriage, gun rights and bail outs, the Obama Admin is trying to slip this through!
We all agree philosophically, but that’s not the question to address. I may be naive, but I think it revolves around the “full faith and credit” clause of the Constitution. That clause is at the heart of the homosexual marriage debate. I suspect that a very wealthy, influential person with a valid CCW permit from somewhere in one of our states could carry in, f’r example, Massachussetts, get arrested, and take the case to SCOTUS and be expected to prevail. Maybe this should be our leverage?
Another Federal power grab.
Do you really want the nitwits in the Federal Goverment having control over your right to concealed carry, especially the gun hating, liberal/social engineers currently in power? I think not.
Throw this piece of crap legislation out.
Can it be that there are those who really would trust this dirty congress with ANY type of gun legislation knowing full well that it is tainted by obama and all of the sycophants and bottom suckers that thrive on this current admin ability to give people money who don’t deserve it?
Just look at them…coniving, lying, obfuscating, behind closed door deals, chicago politics! Trust? Get real. You don’t have a congress, you have a bunch of opportunists who will wreck every thing that you hold dear and true and in it’s place will be put perversion, thought control, speech curtailment, pravda-like news (if not there now) and catering to every power player in the country that will vote for oboma the next time.
What you have or might as well have is a gov similar to Iran…no matter who votes or how many, the rats behind the scenes will call the shots.
What do you do about it? Ideally if I could I personally would take everyone of the “congressmen” and exile them to a learning institution such as Hati,Russia, Iran, France, England and let them learn what it is to be a common citizen. And then, with empty seats in the capital, go coast to coast and find Real Americans with common sense, backbone, courage, patriotism, business sense, morality, and a love for America as the absolute BEST country on the planet. VOTE THE RATS OUT, OUT, OUT! AND DON’T GIVE AN INCH.
How could anyone have any confidence in anything any of them say, including the top theft-and-lying CEO, obama it’s self!
Every one needs to read and keep up withthe rats in congress and next time…VOTE ‘EM OUT and try to find Real Americans to do the business of America.
There are so many people in Washington who think they are our saviors we have to make certain that in every election we vote against the incumbant regardless. It’s called a shotgun fix.
Correct me if I’m wrong. The government is now in charge of our banks(financial), our cars (auto manufactures), CBS media (read drudge report), medical (wants government medical), religion (hate crime bill) among a few others & now our right to bear arms (freedom). I have heard that ammunition is scarce now. If they can’t take away our right to bear arms, then they can control the production of ammunition, then they wouldn’t have to worry about your weapons. it’s another sneaky under the table attack. Have you looking in one direction & attacking from another direction & by the time you notice it, it’ll be too late.
I agree “don’t take the candy”. Once we allow the Feds to control the issuing of permits they have us.
I hold a permit in the state of Arizona, I had to take a class and a test, finger prints that were sent to the FBI, to get the permit.
All gun purchases here also go the the FBI’s instant check.
Criminals will never do what is right.
How much does it cost for a ccw, and also how far back do they do a background check. I got in trouble in 1981, I only got probation. I have been straight since then. I paid a lawyer to get exsponged and as far as I know it was done. How do I find out.
Trusting the Fed’s with a blank check to regulate CWC is tantamount to hiring Colonel Sanders to babysit your chicken.
There are only two states (that I am aware of)that do not recognize CWC. Illinois and Wisconsin. And we all know where Obama hails from. We don’t need 50 states with Obama’s “common sense” Chicago gun laws. Chicago, Milwaukee, San Fransico, DC. Oh please. Allow me to stroll those streets with my daughter unarmed.
Minnesota has a law that requires retreat before use of deadly force. Now how stupid is that. I will be judged by 12 rather than carried out by 6 if I need to test that law.
I ride motorcycle and have gone thru many states and national parks where it was questionable that my CWC permit was valid. I carry when I am at church or visiting my son’s colege campus. Am I wrong in doing so? Not if there is a need for it. If there becomes national gun laws I am going to be wrong a lot.
Do you think that CCW is another way to know who has firearms ? Is that possible? I will not get the CCW
The goverment has a enough to do besides being in to everybodyes business be it gun,s or anyother part of your every day lives of just get by in this time of hardships (WE) are all into in the USA.
I don’t want the goverment controling my life any more than they already are.
I think it’s a Trojan Horse and I don’t trust the Feds with my 2nd amendment rights.
It seems that anything that the Feds get involved with winds up costing us money and being another abortion. We really NEED another bureauacracy that makes work simply to procreate itself. If the anti gun people are so serious about safety, why no outcry with allowing Hinkley out of prison to visit his mother and to get a drivers license. Why does loudmouth Sarah Brady not go off on this. Keep the Feds out of anything possible.
I don’t won’t or need anything
from the federal goverment other than what was set forth in the orginal constitition by the founding Father’ of this Nation. They spelled that out clealy and it didn’t need interpation then ,and certianly doesn’t need these sociaist to do that now…
As a citizen you should stand
by our constitution as it stands
at present. (before it becomes
a “living whatever.”)
That requires you to be soldiers
on the home front. Honor our troops on home soil as they defend our rights while abroad.
The 2nd ammendment allows us to do just that.
Don’t ever allow our troops to have to come home to find the rights they’ve fought for not
waiting for them when they return. God help us in these
times.
I read every comment. What do we do? We can only get term limits within our States not on the Federal Level. The Obamanation do what they want, disregarding existing laws. Do we merge all of the gun rights groups under one umbrella where we would then have major clout? What do we do?
I carry when I want to, I will defend my family.
I was actually looking at this as using Alaska and Vermont as case law and deleting the requirement for CCW permits entirely.
It cost me at least $700.00 to aquire a NYC pistol license for my house that required at least 4 trips over 6 months to NYC from an outer borough(Staten Island) I cannot get a carry permit unless I show cause or I am famous(Chuck Schumer, Bill Cosby, or Robert Dinero). I will move to Florida in order to carry concealed, its that important. To allow a federal license we would be allowing the Obama machine to have a list readily available to it to confiscate. States rights are really important at this time for so many reasons. Read Marc Levin’s book and you will see why the statist wants everything centralized. States Rights protect us by offerring different laws and different choices to foster individualism. All you have to do is move there.
Until we replace those in Washington with patriot Americans who beleive in the Constition and Bill of Rights as they were intended to be, I do not trust the Feds with a national ccw law.
bad idea I’am from the goverment I will not take advanage of this ….RIGHT
You said a mouthfull Townsend. It certainly didn’t take the supreme court to define “individual” in the Heller fiasco. Now we have a bunch of idiots that think second guessing Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson makes them smart. Go figure. What we have is a bunch of self serving politicians that have no clue that our country is the “people” not a self serving government.
Bill,
I just read your thread. I’ve been in trouble all my life…. just ask my wife. As long as you don’t have a felony charge against you (I think for the last ten years?) you are good to go. Like my grandfather always said…”I wouldn’t give a nickel for a kid that didn’t get into a little trouble”.
When you go to buy a gun the gun shop will run a background check. In Minnesota it takes about 10 minutes. Aren’t computers wonderful. If you buy a gun out of your home state the gun dealer will have to mail the gun to a gun shop in your home state. So be sure you know addresses of where to send it. If you buy from a private individual that is a different deal. That is what all the gun ban activists have chosen to raise hell about these days. Ignore them.
My advice is do not buy a revolver (six shooter). They carbon up. My .357 S&W does anyway. Stay with the semi auto’s. Take a serious look at a large caliber Glock. The .45 Glock is a beaut. I settled for a 9mm Barretta because I got a good deal and I am not disappointed. Taurus makes a seriously good weapon. Smith and Wesson, Remington aren’t in the business to lose out either. Go to a gun show in your area. Find the one that feels right and go with it. Above all take care of it and TRAIN to use it. It’s like riding motorcycle. If you have to “look” for the controls it is too late.
One more thing. The gun shows will have shoulder holster vendors. Don’t settle for second best. Your life may depend on it.
Here is hoping you never have to use it. Dan
i can believe that there are those who enjoy the freedoms that our fore fathers fought for..only for there self interest to destroy the good nation we live in…. yes we can stand together and over come those and there self interest,so they should be no threat to our children… semper fi…
I live in the Peoples Republic of California, where one cannot get a CCW unles you are a close personal friend of the local Sheriff in your county. I have witnessed two seperate shootings and have testified in court, where one of the defendants was stupid enough to look at me and give a throat cutting motion to me. The Judge put a restaining order against the individual not to come with 500 yards of me, anytime and anywhere. I applied for a CCW and the clerk said the Sherrif was not taking any applications. The next time I witnessed a drive by shooting and gave the police a description of the car and the shooter. I again applied and was once again was told my request lacked sufficient justification to be processed. The last instance was when a neighbor who has had problems with everyone in the neighborhood threatened to kill me. The sherrifs were called, he denied making the threat to kill me, I played a tape for the sherrif from an earlier incident where the neighbor said he would get me one way or another. The investigating sheriff’s told me to carry a gun when I’m out in my yard and that I have the right to defend my self on my property. I said I was going to apply for a CCW and they advised me to forget doing that because the SHERIFF won’t give out CCW’s unless you are a personal friend or are very wealthy. So much for the 14th ammendment for equal protections under the Law.
I’m presently on my 1st renewal of my CCW in Ohio. From my point of view we need nothing from the Feds to regulate anything. The last several years they have made a “Land of Diaster” out of our Great Nation. I agree that all of the states should be left to decide on rules and regs, with public comment and voting on the issues.If there is a state that won’t recognize my permit from OH. I will respect their decision until what time their citizens change the rules.I’m totally aginst any gun laws added to the present pending Hate Crime bills.
I don’t see why this shouldn’t be allowed. In my home state of California you have to be a friend of the Sheriff or have a very serious reason why you need a CCW. I am a retired cop and, up until a couple of years ago, couldn’t carry my firearm in most states.
People who have CCW’s are, in my experience, good people.
Every time I hear of the village idiots in Washington, D.C. coming up with a new idea about anything I always ponder the following:
CAN ANY ONE TELL ME OF ANY PROBLEM THE GOVERNMENT EVER FIXED????
Under no circumstances let these dummies get near your guns.
1. The government has NO Authority to license a right.
2. the government/commerce/associations/individuals cannot achieve by re-defintion what cannot be achieved [reached] by Law.
3. the second amendment does not authorize or otherwise empower the government to enact/create any armed citizen weapon [gun] control/access regulations, restrictions, or provisions.
4. Article 6 mandates that each state will honor the laws of the several states.
5. the definition of marriage is uniquely a definiton of the Christian Religion… the government does not have any say in the matter nor does the government have the authority to change the Christian definition.
6. the Constitutional reference to “a well regulated militia” is uniquely “a definition of AND by” the Men who turned out at Lexington, Concord, Boston [years before those same Men of the 'well regulated milita' CREATED the County - State - Federal GOVERNMENTS], Saratoga, [the non Continentals] at the cow pens and Kings mountain… and the Men, who having won a war for Liberty, ordered and directed the creation of the several government to secure themsleves and their posterity in the Natural Rights… ‘the right to self defense’ through the keeping and bearing of private arms at the whim of the Lawful Man = which includes and is the most modern fire power of the day public – military – individual
agin, the ‘militia’ are the Men who turned out in thier capacity as the second amendment secured “militia” to Honor Washington [in his Farewell tour of the States] in every State.
For the purpose of fixing the defintion of ‘well regulated miltia weel AFTER passgae of the seciond amendment… most notably in those States where the collectivist thugs running the State governments ordered the ‘State Militia’ to stand down because the guys in power Hated Washington…
no historic definiton of “militia” admits to any government regulation or comment; except, of course, the ravings of the legal and political hacks posing as Judiciary in America in support of their America Hating marxist brethern.
absent the ‘Authority to act’ nothing a government employee does is valid, has the force or effect of Law, justifies any action pursuant to it/them… empty legilation – empty executive action – empty Judicial decrees/orders are utterly void, as if in contemplation and justify nothing done under them.
mark