Wednesday, February 22, 2017

US District,Appeal and SCOTUS are abusing their authority! 
 First and foremost Judges have absolutely no authority to legislate from the bench... under the US Constitution Bill of Rights their only job is to make sure the US Constitution/Bill of Rights are followed in reference to Laws, rules and regulations imposed by congress. It is not I repeat not their job to interpret the US Constitution/Bill of Rights but to follow it as it is written in simple and plain terms by our founders and written so anyone with a eighth grade education can understand!

Furthermore under the Bill of Rights the 2nd Amendment states the right to bear does not say nor state the type of only single shot, muzzle loaded, black powder muskets...which were the weapon of the day when the amendment was written. Our founders were intelligent and realized that as we progressed over the centuries new and innovative weapons would be developed as well as all forms of transportation,medical treatments etc.

Therefore the courts are abusing their authority and are legislating from the bench ...thus violating the US Constitution/Bill of Rights as written!
To put it in simple terms...under their oxymoron decision this would mean that all modern forms of arms, transportation ,medicine etc are limited to what was available in the1700's ie: Horse and buggy,steam engine trains and vessels as well as barbaric medical treatment such as bleeding out to address infections etc!
Either Progressive judges are really dumbed down by the progressive school systems of today ie: lack of reading comprehension...or they are violating the sedition conspiracy law {18 U.S. Code § 2384 } attempting to destroy the US Constitution/Bill of Rights and our Republic form of government... either way they should be impeached, prosecuted and removed from office!

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Ban of ‘Assault Weapons’
ANNAPOLIS, Md. (AP) — Maryland’s ban on 45 kinds of assault weapons and its 10-round limit on gun magazines were upheld Tuesday by a federal appeals court in a decision that met with a strongly worded dissent.
See article:

No comments:

Post a Comment