Quote of the Day
I introduced the National Constitutional Carry Act to prohibit states from requiring a permit to carry a firearm.
No one should have to beg the government to exercise a constitutionally protected right anywhere in the country.
Let’s get this done!
Thomas Massie @RepThomasMassie
Posted on X, December 7, 2024
Attack on the legislative as well as the judicial paths to sensible gun law reform. This is the way.
Agreed because the courts are lazy and erratic and don’t forget the executive now that it is going to be friendly for a while. Perhaps rather than abolishing the ATF we could use it as a hammer.
A lot of folks thought it was a bad idea to involve the Federal gubermint more than it already is. The Bill of Rights plainly states our right to possess and carry weapons shall not be interfered with, but for two centuries now would be and actual oppressors have successfully done exactly that. Since the powers that be are already blatantly ignoring the Constitution in many places, what makes you think they won’t ignore a simple Federal statute? Also, if the political worm turns a future statist government may pass a Federal law prohibiting the carrying of pistols as an example. Instead of piling yet another law on the creaking mountain of legal code in this country let’s try enforcing the existing ones. If originalist judges can be seated and only net contributors seated as jurors as was originally intended by our founders we can quickly remove from office and imprison all gubermint weasels who have forsworn their oaths to uphold the Constitution and have actively worked to oppress the people by attempting or succeeding in violating their God given, Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
IF they can manage to get this through both houses and signed in the oval office it will be a nice band-aid.
What really needs to be done is pass an Amendment which in plain language mandates to hold accountable, penalize, strip of all benefits, and permanently bar from public office any member of government (elected, appointed, or hired) who voted in favor of or enforced a statute or regulation found to be un-Constitutional.
Sadly, that’s about as likely to occur as the mouse successfully belling the cat.
“Sadly, that’s about as likely to occur as the mouse successfully belling the cat.”
“Belling the cat” is merely treating the symptom; the solution is to eliminate the cat.
In this particular instance, I was unaware that a Constitutional provision required statutory assistance for implementation or effectiveness; my assumption was that “statutory” was dependent upon “Constitutional” for effectiveness.
I stand corrected. Carry on.
You’ve not been corrected.
It’s simply that as things stand there is no mandatory requirement that the legislature actually penalize members who act contrary to the Constitution.
They CAN act, and have the power to do so, but rarely do.
My suggestion isn’t to create a statue mandating that all such instances be prosecuted, as statutes can be repealed or found un-Constitutional.
I’d see it done as an Amendment.
Just yesterday the Supreme Court decided that the Spirit of Aloha trumps the 2A. Yet another example of why we can’t depend on courts.