Governor Quinn Promises to Fight Conc...

Governor Quinn Promises to Fight Concealed Carry Bill After It Passes in House

There are 3 comments on the MyStateline.com story from May 24, 2013, titled Governor Quinn Promises to Fight Concealed Carry Bill After It Passes in House. In it, MyStateline.com reports that:

The Illinois House has passed a concealed carry bill, 85-30, which would set uniform standards for concealed carry statewide.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at MyStateline.com.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#1 May 24, 2013
"Affray....

"5. Nor unless such wearing be accompanied with such circumstances as are apt to terrify the people; consequently the wearing of common weapons, or having the usual number of attendants, merely for ornament or defense, where it is customary to make use of them, will not subject a person to the penalties of this act. Ibid. s. 9.[Pg. 50]

"Act of 1805, 2 Rev. Code, ch. 83, p. 108.

"Sect. 1. No free negro or mulatto shall keep or carry a fire-lock of any kind, or military weapon, or powder, or lead, without a licence from the court of the county or corporation; which licence may, at any time, be withdrawn. Arms, &c. so kept, shall be forfeited to the informer...."

"(A) A Certificate of the seizure of a gun, &c. on sect. 8, of 1 Rev, Code, p 187.

"county, to wit.

"Whereas AJ, of the county aforesaid, labourer, hath this day brought before me, JP, a justice of the peace for the said county, one gun, with powder and shot, by him found and seized in the bands and possession of a certain free mulatto man, known by the name of (or negro man slave belonging to as the case may be) who is not by law qualified to keep the same; and the said AJ having also, before me, made due proof of such seizure as aforesaid. By virtue of an act of the general assembly in that case made and provided, I do hereby order and direct, that the said AJ shall and may retain the said gun, powder and shot, to his own use; and that the said mulatto man shall receive thirty lashes upon his bare back, well laid on, which last sentence AC, a constable in this county, is ordered ta exetute. Given under my hand and seal, &c.
[Pg. 554]

SLAVES.

(B) Licence to keep arms and ammunition.

[This can only be granted by the court. See 2 Rev. Code, ch. 83, p 108.][Pg. 555]

-[The New Virginia Justice, Comprising the Office and Authority of a Justice of the Peace, in the Commonwealth of Virginia. TOGETHER WITH A VARIETY OF USEFUL PRECEDENTS, ADAPTED TO THE LAWS NOW IN FORCE. TO WHICH IS ADDED AN APPENDIX, CONTAINING ALL THE MOST APPROVED FORMS IN CONVEYANCING: SUCH AS DEEDS OF BARGAIN AND SALE, OF LEASE AND RELEASE; OF TRUST, MORTGAGES, BILLS OF SALE, &c. ALSO, THE DUTIES OF A JUSTICE OF THE PEACE, ARISING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES. By William Waller Hening, Attorney At Law. The Second Edition, Revised, Corrected, Greatly Enlarged, and Brought Down to the Present Time. By the Author. RICHMOND: PUBLISHED BY JOHNSON & WARNER. 1810.]

"Licensing" was intended for "SLAVES", and NOT free people.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#2 May 24, 2013
United States Constitution: Second Article of Amendment; Restrictive Clause;

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

United States Constitution:

Article. IV.

Section. 1.

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section. 2.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

Article. VI.: 2nd and 3rd clauses;

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#3 May 24, 2013
In United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875), the court ruled the following:

"The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to what is called, in The City of New York v. Miln, 11 Pet. 139, the "powers which relate to merely municipal legislation, or what was, perhaps, more properly called internal police," "not surrendered or restrained" by the Constitution of the United States."

And, although many parts of Cruikshank have been overturned by later decisions, it is still relied upon with some authority in portions. Cruikshank was also reaffirmed in Presser v. Illinois in 1886.

That being the case concerning the view of the court concerning the second amendment at that time. And for more than 100 years thereafter. Then how can the court reconcile the following?:

1934 National Firearms Act

1938 Federal Firearms Act

1968 Gun Control Act

1972 Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms created

1986 Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act

1990 Crime Control Act

1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act

Did not the federal government totally disregard the ruling of the court? Not to mention the express prohibition found within the “Restrictive clause” of the Second Article of Amendment to the United State Constitution itself:

“the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

I contend it can be firmly held that the federal government has indeed disregarded the prior ruling of the court. In addition to the clear restriction found within the second amendment itself.

Why? Has the court joined in a long running conspiracy with the other branches of the federal government. And this in order to deprive part or all of We The People of our preexisting Constitutionally secured right? It certainly appears that way, does it not? Especially after considering that the right to keep and bear arms was intended as the final checkpoint in our system of checks and balances.

What has happened to our intended system of “checks and balances”?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pat Quinn Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) Apr 6 RolloTurd 52,049
News Rauner courts black votes with $1M investment (Oct '14) Mar 28 Imgreat 17
News Endorsement: Fairley for Democratic nomination ... Mar '18 Correct 1
News Tired Of Promises, A Struggling Small Town Want... (Apr '17) Feb '18 Joe Dirt 12
News Blue Island eyes rowing center, larger marina (Jul '14) Sep '16 BIWitness 80
News Ex-Illinois governor petitions for Chicago mayo... (Jun '16) Jun '16 Ferrisbueller 2
News Kadner: Rita serious about state-owned casino (Mar '14) Sep '15 DMF 74