Sunday, December 06, 2015
TX: Open Carry Protest in Denison
DENISON, Texas -- Two men in Denison got some attention Friday after they decided to exercise their Second amendment rights.
If you went past Denison City Hall Friday, you might have seen two guys with guns legally protesting on a public side walk.
"First of all it's my human right and second of all it's my constitutional right," said protester Andre Esparza.
Back in January Esparza visited Waterloo Park with his children and brought his shotgun along. The only problem, city ordinance declares the the park a gun free zone.
"There was no intent to cause any alarm or panic to anybody," said Esparza. "I just grabbed my gun and went."
More Here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
First of all who is not an American citizen with the right to travel freely in this country? secondly is the United States constitution required to protect us all? are you or we supposed to leave our federally guaranteed rights at the state border or do those right cross the state borders with us? by the tenth amendment in the bill of rights. individual states have no power to change anything in the federal constitution. therefore states can not change what the second amendment demands. Shall not infringe on the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. Where in the second amendment does it state "except for what the individual states feel like doing"? In the 1930s and 40s the state of California passed a law that prevented people from crossing the state line into California. The United States Supreme court overturned that law. Now California has passed a law that prevents anyone from taking a gun into the state without a legal hassle. How is that any different than trying to prevent the movement of citizens crossing the state line for any reason? I say again there are no legal state gun laws because the second amendment is in the United States Constitution. Is it the same as passing a law that would prevent any or all religion from being exercised freely? No that would be a violation of the first amendment because it is backed up by the force of the tenth amendment. States can not add to or take away from anything in the federal constitution. every state and territory is required to uphold and enforce the federal constitution as written above their own. Shall not infringe means exactly that , any law that infringes on the right to keep and bear arms is void. Congress is forbidden to pass laws and acts that infringe on guaranteed rights. the tenth amendment forbids authority to change anything in the federal constitution by the states. Since the U. S. congress is forbidden then so are the states. Any acts or laws passed by congress concerning Arms are forbidden. If laws and acts exist it makes no difference how long they have existed if they are unconstitutional they are always unconstitutional. We have ben massaged into thinking the government can do these things when it factually can not. Shall not infringe has never been changed.
Keeping thing in perspective, the government did not create the people, the people created the government. When we created the government we limited that governments authority with things like shall not infringe Since we have a constitution is it proper for government to tell us what those limitations are?
Virginia University pres. to students: Carry guns
(CNN)At a time when most college campuses prohibit guns, Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr. thinks the opposite should be the case -- urging his school's students to be armed, especially in light of this week's massacre in San Bernardino, California.
www.cnn.com/2015/12/05/us/liberty-university-urges-armed-students/index.html
The good news is that in September of this year a law that prevents TX governments from having No Gun Zones on government owned or operated property, except where explicitly referenced by the law, is forbidden. In fact, I have seem several sites remove such signs and now allow CCW. There is also a ruling that you can not make the entire facility gun free when only one portion (e.g. court room) can be a no gun zone. So, Abbott is making good progress, but more is needed.
Lets hope, in January, when open carry with a permit goes into effect that there are no problems on either side of the issue. Texas is mostly made up of "sane" government employees, but there are some questionable areas like Austin, Houston, and San Antonio.
Post a Comment