you think the m-f scotus decision is bad?

AK-47 » AK Discussions

AK Sponsor:

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - you think the m-f scotus decision is bad?

Posted: 12/11/2003 7:19:00 AM EDT

hah!

our government has been pulling crap like this since damn near day one.

and it isn't just the courts.

it is often said that we are a nation of laws. well, there are too damn many laws, as far as i'm concerned!

i'm told there are over 22,000 laws regarding firearms, alone!

and below i'll post an example of just one law that blows the scotus decision back into perspective.

remember, the year was 1798...back when all those 'godz' in their powdered wigs still walked the earth...and liberty and freedom was trod upon JUST AS EASILY THEN as it is today.

gentlemen and citizens of the republic, i give you...the sedition act of 1798!

An Act in addition to the act, entitled "An act for the punishment of certain crimes against the United States. "

SEC. I Be it enacted . . ., That if any persons shall unlawfully combine or conspire together, with intent to oppose any measure or measures of the government of the United States, which are or shall be directed by proper authority, or to impede the operation of any law of the United States, or to intimidate or prevent any person holding a place or office in or under the government of the United States, from undertaking, performing or executing his trust or duty; and if any person or persons, with intent as aforesaid, shall counsel, advise or attempt to procure any insurrection, riot. unlawful assembly, or combination, whether such conspiracy, threatening, counsel, advice, or attempt shall have the proposed effect or not, he or they shall be deemed guilty of a high misdemeanor, and on conviction, before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, and by imprisonment during a term not less than six months nor exceeding five years; and further, at the discretion of the court may be holden to find sureties for his good behaviour in such sum, and for such time, as the said court may direct.

SEC. 2. That if any person shall write, print, utter. Or publish, or shall cause or procure to be written, printed, uttered or published, or shall knowingly and willingly assist or aid in writing, printing, uttering or publishing any false, scandalous and malicious writing or writings against the government of the United States, or either house of the Congress of the United States, or the President of the United States, with intent to defame the said government, or either house of the said Congress, or the said President, or to bring them. or either of them, into contempt or disrepute; or to excite against them, or either or any of them, the hatred of the good people of the United States, or to excite any unlawful combinations therein, for opposing or resisting any law of the United States, or any act of the President of the United States, done in pursuance of any such law, or of the powers in him vested by the constitution of the United States, or to resist, oppose, or defeat any such law or act, or to aid, encourage or abet any hostile designs of any foreign nation against the United States, their people or government, then such person, being thereof convicted before any court of the United States having jurisdiction thereof, shall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand dollars, and by imprisonment not exceeding two years.

SEC. 3. That if any person shall be prosecuted under this act, for the writing or publishing any libel aforesaid, it shall be lawful for the defendant, upon the trial of the cause, to give in evidence in his defence, the truth of the matter contained in the publication charged as a libel. And the jury who shall try the cause, shall have a right to determine the law and the fact, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.

SEC. 4. That this act shall continue to be in force until March 3, 1801, and no longer....

Posted: 12/11/2003 8:21:36 AM EDT

[#1]

Thank god for sunset clauses!

SEC. 4. That this act shall continue to be in force until March 3, 1801, and no longer....

Posted: 12/11/2003 9:03:44 AM EDT

[#2]

It really is the fallout of the 1960's hippies. They are the liberals in charge theses days.

Most got haircuts, that's all.

Posted: 12/11/2003 9:47:38 AM EDT

[#3]

Its considered robery when you trespass wile in posesion of a weapon. Don't go huntin on sombody else's property.....

If you use a silencer or any device used to lower the DBs of a gun wile comiting a crime its a automatic 5 years tacked on to your sentence. There was a guy that was convicted with this because he broke in someones house, and thretened them by puting a potato on the end of his gun.

Posted: 12/11/2003 10:05:21 AM EDT

[#4]

PRESIDENT AL Sharpton will clean up this mess.

5sub

Posted: 12/11/2003 10:14:07 AM EDT

[#5]

believe it or not, i heard wayne lapierre on npr radio news this morning. wayne was explaining that the nra will find a way around the scotus decision and continue the fight.

Posted: 12/11/2003 10:14:37 AM EDT

[#6]

Wow, and here I thought it was the drugs......I come back from "DA HAZE" to: SS payments for mexicans (T. Ridge), amnesty for same (all Rhinos), apologize to the euro-pukes (ALL FROM JERKS I PAID TO SUPPORT!!!!!!) .

"Soapbox, ballotbox, then cartridge box, as my thankfully long dead WWII father taught me....."

Sometimes I'm glad he didn't live to see this.

grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted: 12/11/2003 11:06:02 AM EDT

[#7]

Quoted:
believe it or not, i heard wayne lapierre on npr radio news this morning. wayne was explaining that the nra will find a way around the scotus decision and continue the fight.

I'm waiting for the courts to explain why it's alright for Time-Warner to own CNN but not alright for the NRA to own television or radio stations.

5sub

Posted: 12/11/2003 11:55:51 AM EDT

[#8]

Thats a good question.

I don't know where government gets power to tell any company what it can own.

Posted: 12/12/2003 11:05:17 AM EDT

[#9]

1st ammendment has been trampled(campaign finance reform, NRA tv)

2nd is being trampled....

I'm sittin here SMOKING an CIG., listening to CHRISTMAS music...And loading clips.....Keep taking my rights...GO AHEAD.....MOLON LABE!!!!!

Posted: 12/12/2003 9:59:24 PM EDT

[#10]

What decision exactly got made? The one where they refused to hear Silveira vs. Lockyear?

Posted: 12/12/2003 10:43:33 PM EDT

[#11]

Yeah what descision was made? I have no clue what people are talking about in this thread for the most part.

Posted: 12/13/2003 6:21:08 AM EDT

[#12]

I THINK they are talking about Silveira!? I know I was shocked that they chose to ignore it.I thought it was the perfect case to be reviewed by them. California has publichly stated that they have the right to ignore the second amendment, which is in violation of the 14th amendment, States requirement to obey the constitution and bill of rights.
Anybody know the email for the justices of the S.C.? Maybe they need a deluge of email to remind them that they work for US!
OJF

Posted: 12/13/2003 7:04:35 AM EDT

[#13]

Yeah, I've always wondered how a court can decide not to hear a case.

I mean, I understand that there's some sort of checks and balances as far as appeals go, otherwise I'd have appealed a speeding ticket all the way to the SCOTUS by now, but I'm curious how that works.

Posted: 12/13/2003 8:21:48 AM EDT

[#14]

this thread is in response to the sumpreme's ruling on the mkcain-feingold campanign finance act...a travesty of 'justice' gone amoke.

basically, with the ruling analyzed, the constitution has just been used as toilet paper...AGAIN...by the politicians and judges that run the system.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - you think the m-f scotus decision is bad?

AK-47 » AK Discussions

AK Sponsor:

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us