Crimes Against The Constitution - BOR

[mnrivrat]

I am wondering if anyone has ever attempted to hold state legislators responsible legaly for the infringement of the 2nd amendment ?

It seems clear on the surface at least that laws have been passed by state governments that are unconstitional. The Supreme court recently upheald the individual right to keep and bear arms but fell way short of preventing state laws from infringing on those rights.

Anyone who believes that there are no current state laws (as well as Federal) that infringe on our rights, should apply current gun laws to other products.

Sir - Do you have a permit to eat that double Wopper ? (if New York's Bloomberg had his way)

Is that butter knife properly serial numbered and registored ?

Is that thong bikini registored on the assualt product list and licensed for use in your state ?

Sorry sir - the USPS does not accept bikini's for mailing .

 

[beatledog7]

We live in a world in which "reasonable regulation" trumps "shall not be infringed."

As long as the ones in power believe they have a right to force their ideology on everyone in spite of the Constitution, this will not change. Since we keep on electing such people to office, we're pretty much getting what we asked for.

 

[mnrivrat]

Since we keep on electing such people to office, we're pretty much getting what we asked for.

Actualy I think that stopped being true some time ago. Our choices are picked for us in the field of candidates, and Joe the plumber has absolutely no chance of even getting on the ballet for the most part. If you review the carriers of the candidates and where they get their support from, we have little choice on who our elected officials are when it comes to being a true public servant.

When the camera's are off they are pretty much the same, whether called Democrates or Republicans. Behind closed doors they are smoking Cuban cigars and drinking top shelf burban and discussing tomorrows show .They are all politicians giving service to someone, or group of someones, besides the average working american . But that's a different thread

Anyway - to stay on track I am realy interested in any case that a politician or group of politicians were held accountable in any way for making a law that is, or was, unconstitutional.

Also would like to know when Eric Holder is going to be arrested on his contempt of congress charge. ( I think I know this one)

 

[Pilot]

Actualy I think that stopped being true some time ago. Our choices are picked for us in the field of candidates, and Joe the plumber has absolutely no chance of even getting on the ballet for the most part. If you review the carriers of the candidates and where they get their support from, we have little choice on who our elected officials are when it comes to being a true public servant.

When the camera's are off they are pretty much the same, whether called Democrates or Republicans. Behind closed doors they are smoking Cuban cigars and drinking top shelf burban and discussing tomorrows show .They are all politicians giving service to someone, or group of someones, besides the average working american . But that's a different thread

Anyway - to stay on track I am realy interested in any case that a politician or group of politicians were held accountable in any way for making a law that is, or was, unconstitutional.

Also would like to know when Eric Holder is going to be arrested on his contempt of congress charge. ( I think I know this one)

I think accountability with politicians, and un-elected government officials is a huge issue. There does not seem to be any recourse when these people break, or bend the law, including the Constitution. Yes, we can vote politicians out of office, but then they are replaced with someone similar. The party does not matter, they both work for their moneyed handlers, with a sole purpose of re-election.

Tar, and feathering used to be an option, and a deterrent, but that can't happen in today's "civilized" society.

 

[Ryanxia]

Our fore fathers knew at some point this great system they created would fail us, which is why we have the Second Amendment. At some point it comes down to using them or losing the Freedom they secured for us. (I'm certainly NOT implying that we should use them now)

 

[Midwest]

I used to think that if one could just prove that a state's anti-gun laws put someone's life in jeopardy or ended up with a loss of life because a person could not legally defend themselves in that state...They could sue to have those laws overturned because they were unconstitutional.

One can use that argument in a hearing order to help have the law changed, but cannot use it to have have the laws declared unconstitutional and overturned.

Because if one could prove that a state's anti-gun laws put someone in harms way and that someone was seriously injured or killed and therefore 'unconstitutional' ....then the 1911 Sullivan Law in New York State would have been overturned decades ago on that basis. And it has not happened.

One wonders what the outcome would be if ('the shoulder thing that goes up') Senator Carolyn McCathy's husband was on was packing on that train and shot back at Colin Ferguson. Chances are Mr McCarthy could still be alive today and be remembered a hero who saved lives. Instead, his wife used his death to run for office to promote an anti-gun agenda.

 

[vamo]

No you can't sue/press charges against lawmakers or government branches for passing bad laws. If the law happens to be unconstitutional you can get it thrown out in court, but we've seen how thats easier said than done.

Sir - Do you have a permit to eat that double Wopper ? (if New York's Bloomberg had his way)

Is that butter knife properly serial numbered and registored ?

Is that thong bikini registored on the assualt product list and licensed for use in your state ?

Sorry sir - the USPS does not accept bikini's for mailing .

Every one of these are examples of bad, but not necessarily unconstitutional laws. Though applying them to firearms comes under greater scrutiny since we do have a constitutional right to bear arms. Something more people in our country (judges deciding on these matters included) need to realize is a bad law can be constitutional and a good law can be unconstitutional.

 

[Frank Ettin]

...I am wondering if anyone has ever attempted to hold state legislators responsible legaly for the infringement of the 2nd amendment ?

It seems clear on the surface at least that laws have been passed by state governments that are unconstitional....

1. Arrarently you don't like the way the system is working because you don't like the results it's producing.
   
   
2. But there are many people in this country who are generally satisfied with the system and the results. You think certain laws are unconstitutional. Others think those same laws are constitutional. We've had disagreements on such points since the founding of our Republic. Neither you nor they have the final say on that question. The Founding Fathers assigned that responsibility to the federal courts. See Article III, Sections 1 and 2, of the Constitution:

   Section 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish....
   
   Section 2. The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution,...

   
   
3. Our legislative representatives are held accountable at the ballot box. While it's fashionable to blame politicians for restrictive gun laws, politicians are interested in getting elected and re-elected.
   
   
4. So we can't forget that it really comes down to is our neighbors, the people in our communities, the people in our towns, the people we work with, the people we see at the mall, etc. If enough enough people don't like guns, don't trust the rest of us with guns, and are afraid of guns and people with guns, politicians who take anti-gun stands can get elected and re-elected (and bureaucrats who take anti-gun stands can keep their jobs).

 

[Dain Bramage]

Not a "criminal" legal remedy like the OP is implying, but the recall of three state legislators in Colorado left a nice mark.

 

[Officers'Wife]

No you can't sue/press charges against lawmakers or government branches for passing bad laws. If the law happens to be unconstitutional you can get it thrown out in court, but we've seen how thats easier said than done.



Every one of these are examples of bad, but not necessarily unconstitutional laws. Though applying them to firearms comes under greater scrutiny since we do have a constitutional right to bear arms. Something more people in our country (judges deciding on these matters included) need to realize is a bad law can be constitutional and a good law can be unconstitutional.

Excuse me? For those laws to be Constitutional the government would have to be granted the power in the Constitution. Maybe I missed it so please point out Article and paragraph where the government has been granted the power to legislate what we eat, what we eat with and what we wear.

Thank you.

 

[vamo]

Excuse me? For those laws to be Constitutional the government would have to be granted the power in the Constitution. Maybe I missed it so please point out Article and paragraph where the government has been granted the power to legislate what we eat, what we eat with and what we wear.

Thank you.

Keep in mind NY city's large soda ban was struck down not because it was illegal to restrict the sizes of people's drink, but because it was enacted unilaterally at the executive level without approval by the city council.

Sorry if I'm bursting bubbles here, but the constitution isn't as strong a safety net from an over reaching government as some people think. Bad laws will often stand up to legal scrutiny and not always because of activist judges.

 

[Ivy Mike]

Excuse me? For those laws to be Constitutional the government would have to be granted the power in the Constitution. Maybe I missed it so please point out Article and paragraph where the government has been granted the power to legislate what we eat, what we eat with and what we wear.

Thank you.

The government has been granted the power to write legislation. The government can exercise that power as it sees fit within the confines of the constitution.

The way it works, legislators can write whatever legislation they want and attempt to pass it. The bill goes for debate in the legislature and then goes to the executive for final OK or veto.

Even then, the bill isn't safe if passed as law. The people can still challenge it and the courts can strike it down.


It isn't perfect but it provides a reliable means of keeping bad bills from ever reaching the exec's desk and out of the law books. This does mean that legislators can say they feel something is unhealthy and legislate to remove it's presence in their community. If you don't like it, call your representative and the governor and complain. If you still don't like it after it passes, file a lawsuit as is your right.
Just because a certain law doesn't have the explicit OK in the constitution does not mean it's a bad law and should be tossed.