Gun Rights 'Are' Civil Rights, And Must Be Honored & Protected

Suggestion for fighting the Potential loss of our Second Amendment Rights.
>
I am not a lawyer, but I have done some common sense research into the Second Amendment, and the current restrictions on it, plus the ones pending, and I feel even the threat of a nationwide lawsuit of this scope would make the opposition pull back completely.
>
Gun rights have been an essential buttress to civil rights for black Americans https://dailysign.al/2GDSpo6  via @JarrettStepman @DailySignal
>
>
This makes a lot of sense,read it through. We could make a case that the Govt. is stripping us of our Civil Rights with Gun Control. Civil Rights must apply to all Americans Regardless of Race Creed or Color Equally.
>
Consider this. Civil Rights are based on the Unalienable Rights Protected by the Constitution. All Civil Rights cases are determined by what is written in the Constitution and it's Amendments. Denial of those rights is both a crime, and a Civil Rights Violation>
Therefore, under the Federal Statutes;42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights Title 42 › Chapter 21 › Subchapter I › § 1983
>
and especially under 42 U.S. Code § 1985 - Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights Title 42 › Chapter 21 › Subchapter I › § 1985
>
Using those two Federal Statutes we should be able to initiate a lawsuit against all the Progressive gun grabbers in Congress that have proposed and/or supported bills to restrict gun ownership and the bearing of arms as provided by the Second Amendment. As the gun laws are currently interpreted by Scotus and before any new interpretations come out to deny this legal theory, Neither Congress nor SCOTUS is above the Federal Laws concerning Denial of Civil rights.
 >
What we American citizens must do is twofold, First we must unite to fight this in a nationwide Class action Lawsuit based on existing laws and legal determinations by SCOTUS when the Suit is filed.
>
Second, we must educate the people on what is their Civil Rights according to the Second Amendment despite the spin and faulty interpretations of the left that are currently in vogue, and point out their fallacies and incorrect line of reasoning to our fellow citizens of all ages.
A beginning list of denial of Rights can begin with;
The Congressional ban on modern Machine Gun ownership after the 1988 ban reducing that to the same background checks,permit system,and tax stamps required for ownership of Machine Guns mfg. before the 1988 ban. That would not infringe on our right to own one.
Another Denial of Rights imposed on us by Congress is the Gun Free Zone Act. It needs to be repealed and/or declared unconstitutional because it denies us the Unalienable and Constitutionally Protected Right to Self Defense.
 >
The Background Check System Denies us our Constitutionally Protected right to Privacy and being secure in our homes per the 4th amendment. The Fourth Amendment originally enforced the notion that “each man’s home is his castle”, secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of property by the government.  It protects against arbitrary arrests, and is the basis of the law regarding search warrantsstop-and-frisk, safety inspections, wiretaps, and other forms of surveillance, as well as being central to many other criminal law topics and to privacy law.
>
The expanded background checks system is too far reaching in scope, and directed in ways that defeat it's stated purpose of keeping guns out of the hands of Criminals,Convicted Felons, and Mental cases prohibited from owning firearms. It should simply be a daily updated list of people forbidden to purchase firearms, and it must have a way for those who have been denied to see why, and give them a legal recourse to challenge the determination.
 >
Lack of a Reciprocal Acceptance of each States Carry Permit System by other States, or lack of a complete Constitutional Carry Provision Nationwide, infringes on two areas of our Constitutional Civil Rights. The Unalienable right to self protection, and strangely enough a good case could be made for denial of pursuit of happiness by not feeling secure in our persons. Pursuit of happiness is a stretch I admit, but most precedent setting cases start out that way, and it is being infringed by the Federal Govt. and State Govt's.
 >
This gets down to the Registration of Long guns and hand guns. This didn't come about until the Infamous "Sullivan Law" of 1911 pushed through by the Democratic Party Corrupt Political Machine; Tammany Hall. (  The Supremacy Clause of Article 6 in the U.S. Constitution which states that "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States...shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby."  )
>
This was the first infringement of the 2nd Amendment and the Supremacy Clause, as applied to the States making laws that conflicted with Federal Laws ( There was no Federal Precedent when this law was enacted).  The powers of the Bill of Rights originally intended to apply to limit the powers of the Federal Government, were expanded to support the Fourteenth Amendment's wording that no state could withhold the rights outlined in the Bill of Rights. It also restricts the Federal Government from doing the same.
 >
The knee jerk reaction of Congress on the latest tragedy they caused with the Gun Free Zone Act dictates, is a digression form their stated purpose to Represent their Constituents wishes instead of reacting to emotional issues while ignoring the Facts and the Constitution. The persistence in Wishful thinking about disarming the law abiding public making them safer from Criminal and mental elements which do not follow or obey the laws is Malfeasance on their part, and it contributes to the denial of our Constitutionally Protected Civil Rights.
>
Feel Free to pass this around

Views: 18

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Bonnie Somer on April 16, 2018 at 7:06am

the rallies held on sat april 14 prove them wrong

they are not putting that our there nor will they WE NEED TO BE OUR OWN SPOKESMEN.  

WE NEED TO DO AS THE LEFT IS IN OPPOSITE WAYS TELL OUR TRUTHS AND WHAT WE WANT.  

DAVID HOGG IS NOT THE TELL ALL

LIGHTER SIDE

The cartoonist's homepage, indystar.com/opinion/varvel

ALERT ALERT

Clinton Donor And Tax Cheat Tied To Russia

“Do as we say, not as we do.”

That seems to be the slogan for Hillary Clinton and her political allies, and it’s especially apt in light of new information about one of Clinton’s largest campaign donors.

While the left is still trying to attack President Trump and his family over unproven business dealings and largely debunked connections to Russia, a new report indicates that it was Hillary Clinton’s team who were doing those exact things.

“Fox News has learned that one of the top donors to the ‘Hillary Victory Fund’ (HVF) in 2016 was a Los Angeles-based attorney who is alleged to have misused company funds to create his own $22 million real estate portfolio,” that outlet reported on Thursday.

“He has also been considered by California to be one of the state’s biggest tax cheats, and allegedly has ties to the (Russian) Kremlin,” Fox continued.

The man’s name is Edgar Sargsyan. His deep pockets greatly benefited Clinton’s campaign, with contributions of at least $250,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund in 2016.

He was also in charge of an elite fundraising dinner to benefit Clinton, where donors paid $100,000 per couple just to attend the ritzy event. But in true Clinton fashion, the money apparently went missing.

Sargsyan is now “being sued by his former company for allegedly diverting those funds to start his own real estate company,” according to Fox.

Now, people are asking hard questions about Clinton’s buddy Sargsyan, including whether his contributions were part of a pay-to-play scheme and if he had shady connections to foreign governments.

“Nobody gave to the Hillary Victory Fund out of the goodness of their heart or some generalized desire to help 33 random state parties,” pointed out attorney Dan Backer from the Committee to Defend the President.

“They did so to buy access and curry influence — something the Clintons have been selling for nearly three decades in and out of government,” he continued.

Trying to buy political influence is sadly common, especially when it comes to the Clintons. What is raising more red flags than normal, however, is the evidence that Sargsyan is no run-of-the-mill campaign donor.

“The really scary question is, what did this particular donor with this strange web of connections hope to buy for his quarter-million dollars?” Backer asked Fox News.

That web of connections is strange indeed.

The Committee to Defend the President is now alleging that SBK, a major Sargsyan-linked company “is an investment firm that is affiliated with United Arab Emirates president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and its international affiliate has business interests in Russia,” according to Fox.

“Among its dealings was a bid to finance $850 million for a major bridge project to connect Crimea with Russia,” the group claims.

“He worked for SBK, and SBK appears to have bid on some Crimean/Russian bridge project,” Backer said. “That’s usually an indicator of political favor and connections.”

It raises several chilling questions: Was Sargsyan paying a quarter million dollars to Clinton for political favors, and — more disturbingly — was that money actually from sources in Russia in order to smooth the way for its construction plans?

Nobody knows for sure. What is clear, however, is that there is a pattern of dirty money surrounding the Clintons, with the “Uranium One” and “Clinton Foundation” scandals just two of the most well-known examples.

“It reinforces how fast and loose the Clinton machine was when it came to ‘Hoovering up’ these megadonor checks, not just from questionable Hollywood and Wall Street elites but potentially from foreign influence peddlers using who knows what money,” Backer told Fox News.

“It reinforces the need to take a long hard look at not just the unlawful money laundering process, but the way in which they were solicited as well,” he continued. “The Clintons have never shown a great deal of concern for whomever it was cutting the checks — whether it’s foreign influence peddlers or Hollywood smut peddlers like Harvey Weinstein.”

If those claims are even partially true, then America dodged a bullet in November of 2016 — and it’s worth keeping the pile of foreign-connected Clinton scandals in mind the next time the left tries desperately to tie Donald Trump to Russia. Perhaps they should look in the mirror.

SLAVEHOLDER??

Washington Post Compares
Jeff Sessions To Slaveholder’

The Washington Post compared Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “slaveholders” after he quoted the Bible on Thursday while discussing his department’s policy of prosecuting all illegal immigrants who cross the border.

Sessions made the statement during a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

WaPo ran a story entitled “Sessions cites Bible passage used to defend slavery in defense of separating immigrant families” by general assignment editor Keith McMillan and religion reporter Julie Zauzmer on Friday.

Rather than detailing the statistics Sessions cited in the speech that explain the immigration policy, the story quoted John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.

“This is the same argument that Southern slaveholders and the advocates of a Southern way of life made,” Fea said.

Sessions spent much of the speech discussing the numbers behind current immigration policy, including separating families at the Southwest border.

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions said.

“Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”

“The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute aliens if they came with children,” Sessions said.

“It was de-facto open borders if you came with children. The results were unsurprising. More and more illegal aliens started showing up at the border with children.”

Sessions laid out the numbers in the speech.

“In 2013, fewer than 15,000 family units were apprehended crossing our border illegally between ports of entry in dangerous areas of the country,” he said.

“Five years later, it was more than 75,000, a five-fold increase in five years. It didn’t even have to be their child that was brought, it could be anyone. You can imagine that this created a lot of danger.”

The U.S. has the “opportunity” to fix its broken immigration system now, Sessions said.

“I believe that’s it’s moral, right, just and decent that we have a lawful system of immigration,” he said. “The American people have been asking for it.”

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service