Your votes are not private

[flintauqua]

Steve, please tell me how the 10th admendment gets you around the following clauses of our Constitution and Bill of Rights on the aforementioned subject.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Second paragraph, Article VI of the Constitution:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

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.

Article IV Section 2:

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

[Varmit]

I think ya'll are making this way too complicated.  If a convicted felon that has served his time cannot be trusted to own a firearm based on his criminal history then he shouldn't be let out of prison or he should be killed. 

[flintauqua]

For those on here who aren't uber-rightists, my point in all of this is:

Why is it that only the so called Constitutionalists get to bounce back and forth between the contextualist and strict constructionist approaches to judicial interpretation?  What's good for the goose is good for the gander, isn't it.

[Sarah]

I think ya'll are making this way too complicated.  If a convicted felon that has served his time cannot be trusted to own a firearm based on his criminal history then he shouldn't be let out of prison or he should be killed. 

I think Steve said that in an earlier post.  Different wording, but same idea. 

[sixdogsmom]

Varmit, that is a part of the penalty of being a convicted felon, losing rights. Don't they lose the right to own a firearm as well as the right to vote, and the right to a lot of security clearances? Not just the right to freedom for a prescribed time.

[srkruzich]

I think ya'll are making this way too complicated.  If a convicted felon that has served his time cannot be trusted to own a firearm based on his criminal history then he shouldn't be let out of prison or he should be killed. 

Thats what i said!

[srkruzich]

Varmit, that is a part of the penalty of being a convicted felon, losing rights. Don't they lose the right to own a firearm as well as the right to vote, and the right to a lot of security clearances? Not just the right to freedom for a prescribed time.

Actually that is a violation of the second amendment.  There is no justification to remove these rights past the prescribed time of incarceration and probation or parole. Once said felon has paid his debt to society, his rights according to the constitution must be restored.  So each state and the federal goernment is violating thier rights. 

As i said before and varmit said just a min ago, either keep them in jail or kill them if their not trustworthy enough to own a gun.

[Teresa]

As easy as they are being let out of jail now a days..
... I don't want them owning a gun..

But the laws are only for the law abiding anyway... the others don't care.......

[Anmar]

Kill someone because they aren't trustworthy enough to own a gun?  Can i have some of what you're smoking?

[srkruzich]

Kill someone because they aren't trustworthy enough to own a gun?  Can i have some of what you're smoking?

If they used a gun to commit a crime, either keep em locked up or kill them.  Whats the problem?  Either way they are unable to live amongst law abiding citizens aren't they?