The U.S. Supreme Court has decided not to hear the appeal from the 10th Circuit of Bonidy v. United States Post Office. The case is one in which Tab Bonidy, a Colorado citizen with a concealed carry permit sued the Post Office for infinging the Second Amendment by declaring it a crime for him to carry on Post Office property, including Post Office parking lots. From postalnews.com:
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court won’t hear a dispute over a U.S. Postal Service regulation that bans guns from post office property and adjacent parking lots.It is easy to under stand why Second Amendment supporters on the Court would not want to hear this case at this time. Antonin Scalia is dead. There are now only 3 justices on the Court who can reasonably be counted on to uphold the Second Amendment. They do not want to hear a Second Amendment case that could be used to gut the Amendment.
We do not know who voted to hear the case or not. But I am not surprised that the Court decided not to hear this case.
©2016 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice is included. Link to Gun Watch
Posts
7 comments:
People really need to LEARN what is private and what is public. The Post office is a private business. It is like Federal Express, and just as "federal".
Of course, taking a case like this would expose this reality, and they just cannot have that. Why, people might start getting the idea that much of what is presented to us as "government" really isn't government at all. You know, kinda like the political parties themselves.....
I wish people would start reading the constitution. It would greatly help people to understand many of the issues we are facing today. Justices of any court are required to uphold the laws and the constitution as they are written and until they are changed. The constitution is one of the founding documents of this nation. It was written for the life of this nation not for the first few years that government or the courts choose to respect it. Shall Not Infringe is a permanent command for as long as the constitution is valid. it can not be changed with out an amendment to the constitution that physically changes that specific wording. the same goes for the rest of the bill of rights and anything written in the seven articles of the original constitution. Many of the amendment that have been added are unnecessary if the issue is already covered. it merely requires enforcement of what is already written. Congress could have passed a law to require freeing the slaves we did not need the 14th amendment. women's suffrage did require an amendment. If our founding documents had stated all humans are created equal instead of all men are created equal then women would not have had to be added. slaves would not have needed a law or an amendment. Guns and other weapons were continually being invented and improved. Shall Not Infringe is plain English and it means the same thing today as the day it was written. No justice in any court has the authority to rule on anything that is not written and specifically is limited to exactly what is written. Now the point of this post, The congress has the authority to impeach supreme court justices for violating their oath of office for veering away from their legal authority. read the constitution. Supreme court justices are a life time appointment, AS LONG AS they do not corrupt the constitution or abuse their authority. then congress is required to, in fact mandated to impeach and remove them from the court.
The reason judges are called judges is because they do not have the authority of the kings magistrates, Judges are not permitted to nor do they have any authority to rule in violation of what the law specifically says. Judges are not permitted to have an opinion or any kind of a bias. If they can not in good conscience rule according to exactly what the law requires they have two options they can recuse themselves from the case or they can resign. Read it for yourself in To impeach and remove from office Volume 16 second edition of American jurisprudence. There is no such thing as permitting a judge to be an activist judge. If a judge has ruled in opposition to what the law requires he has physically resigned. If the judge refuses to resign then he must be impeached and removed from the bench. Striped of his ability to practice law and can never hold another job that requires an oath of office or that is paid for with any form of government funds. To be impeached and removed from office is the same as a felony conviction. If impeachment (being charged) must be followed by a trial and removal from office it is mandated in the constitution. Impeachment and removal can not be separated. If a government official is impeached it must be followed by a trail. If convicted in that trial removal from office is automatic and mandatory. I am sick of the corruption that is preventing impeachment and removal from office. Congress has the power to remove its own members. If a congressman is removed from office then the governor of the state is required to appoint his replacement to finish that term. then a new congressman can be elected.
The most recent excuse the court has used is that citizens do not have standing. that is pure crap every legal citizen is a sovereign citizen we have standing in every court in this nation no matter what excuse the courts try to use to prevent us from demanding our grievances be heard. the important place to be heard is a court of law. We actually have the authority to present legislation to state legislator or to the federal congress the reason we are denied this right is because the congress and the courts have corrupted the constitution and made their own rules with out legal amendments. This is what is driving the Trump supporters anger and why the establishment fear his election.
It's a private business? A Private business that can call its employees "government employees". And who have all the perks and retirement options of such. It is an independent agency of the US government. It's buildings, grounds, vehicles and equipment are bought and maintained by the US tax payer. It about as much a private business as the White House is a private residence.
It's a private business? A Private business that can call its employees "government employees". And who have all the perks and retirement options of such. It is an independent agency of the US government. It's buildings, grounds, vehicles and equipment are bought and maintained by the US tax payer. It is not traded publicly as Federal Express is nor can shares be bought by employees as UPS does. It about as much a private business as the White House is a private residence.
In reality, the government owns nothing it's duty is to manage that what is buys with the money of the citizens. the government owns nothing it manages what it buy for we the people. everything the government buys with the tax payers money belongs to the tax payers not the government. this is mandated by the constitution, if government wants to take anything from you it must pay fair market value. this is why air port security can not take anything from you legally is must pay you for what it takes.
Post a Comment