Q-9...First, it is well settled that you do not get to make the determination of what laws may or may not be constitutional or not. You, and others, may not like that, but that is the case. There are many people sitting in Federal prisons who decided that they would not obey a law that they deemed to be unconstitutional. The Courts are the final arbiter of that question, not some jerk water sheriff
Second: If you can not see that it is the same type of persons that are making this "I will refuse to obey or I will refuse to enforce" noise that refused to desegregate and it took Federal troops to force them to obey what was the law of the land. You do not remember, but quite a few people felt that the laws regarding desegregation was unconstitutional even though the Supreme Court said otherwise. My point is NOT dishonest or foolish. It is correct on all four corners and that is what is making you angry because you do not want to be associated with that bunch.
Third: What you may consider to be common sense is viewed by quite a few others (in fact the majority) as pig headed and dumb and that is not elitism.
Fourth: This may come as a suprise, but Congress can ( and does all the time) vote away some individual rights and sometimes those laws are upheld as reasonable restrictions on a subject and sometimes the Courts hold they went too far and strike them down. But until such time as they are striken, those laws are the law of the land. And remember, Congress votes on the law but then the Executive branch puts it into law.
Sixth: I do not mock that sheriff for not being an important national figure. I mock him because he is a self serving jerk who has no business being in law enforcement. Let him run for Congress because that is where the real jerks are.
Seventh: The Supreme Court has ruled many times and in many instances that the law can and does regulate weapons and speech. Sorry that you have just figured that out. So when you are looking for how the Federal Govt got that authority, go to law school and read the myriad of case law.
Eigth: From your last line I believe that you have been born about a century too late and on the wrong continent.
Second: If you can not see that it is the same type of persons that are making this "I will refuse to obey or I will refuse to enforce" noise that refused to desegregate and it took Federal troops to force them to obey what was the law of the land. You do not remember, but quite a few people felt that the laws regarding desegregation was unconstitutional even though the Supreme Court said otherwise. My point is NOT dishonest or foolish. It is correct on all four corners and that is what is making you angry because you do not want to be associated with that bunch.
Third: What you may consider to be common sense is viewed by quite a few others (in fact the majority) as pig headed and dumb and that is not elitism.
Fourth: This may come as a suprise, but Congress can ( and does all the time) vote away some individual rights and sometimes those laws are upheld as reasonable restrictions on a subject and sometimes the Courts hold they went too far and strike them down. But until such time as they are striken, those laws are the law of the land. And remember, Congress votes on the law but then the Executive branch puts it into law.
Sixth: I do not mock that sheriff for not being an important national figure. I mock him because he is a self serving jerk who has no business being in law enforcement. Let him run for Congress because that is where the real jerks are.
Seventh: The Supreme Court has ruled many times and in many instances that the law can and does regulate weapons and speech. Sorry that you have just figured that out. So when you are looking for how the Federal Govt got that authority, go to law school and read the myriad of case law.
Eigth: From your last line I believe that you have been born about a century too late and on the wrong continent.
