2A Comments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Lowell Higley
    Bloodstained
    • Jun 2019
    • 26

    2A Comments

    Hello:
    I think that the second amendment is very, very important to our freedom and our way of life. Left and Right. I have read the rules to this part of the Forum and I want to stay within the rules. However, I do not see to read anything posted herein but agreement to the man writing the rules. So, what do we say and how do we Say it? So here goes.
    I used to be a member of the Nevada Rifle And Pistol Association. The Association sponsored teams to the National Matches. The Association also sponsored teams to Arizona and California to compete and learn. It is gone. I will put a big question mark as to why.
    Is the state of Nevada joining the Left Coast?
    They are in the Process of trying to close the Carson City Rifle and Pistol Range. It is only a three Hundred yard range, but it is a place to legally shoot. Finally, with enough complaints, it was opened on Sundays. Another big question mark.
    I have been reading complaints concerning the NRA and the squandering of funds. Those fund are membership dues and funds out of our pockets that are requested by them, reportedly to fight the good fight. The NRA is not even close to the only organization fighting the good fight. Another big question mark.
    I have read the Constitution six times. I will admit that it is a hard read. Even with the number of times I have read the document, I do not remember it all. I should. But I do not think I am that smart.
    I do remember parts of it, and particularly the Bill Of Rights and the Second Amendment. Maybe I do so because those words mean a great deal to me. No question mark.
    I do know that the Constitution is an Iron Clad Contract, enforceable in a Court of Law. No question mark there.
    Also, I have been reading a number of the rulings of the Supreme Court:
    Marbury v. Madison: 5 US 137 (1803)
    "No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect," "Anything that is in conflict is null and void of Law", "Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all law and for law and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, it would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such law, not from the data so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law."
    There is no question mark here. This ruling is only the beginning.
Working...
X