[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

'Hit Us, Please' - America's Left Issues A 'Broken Arrow' Signal To Europe

Cash Jordan Trump Deports ‘Thousands of Migrants’ to Africa… on Purpose

Gunman Ambushes Border Patrol Agents In Texas Amid Anti-ICE Rhetoric From Democrats

Texas Flood

Why America Built A Forest From Canada To Texas

Tucker Carlson Interviews President of Iran Mosoud Pezeshkian

PROOF Netanyahu Wants US To Fight His Wars

RAPID CRUSTAL MOVEMENT DETECTED- Are the Unusual Earthquakes TRIGGER for MORE (in Japan and Italy) ?

Google Bets Big On Nuclear Fusion

Iran sets a world record by deporting 300,000 illegal refugees in 14 days

Brazilian Women Soccer Players (in Bikinis) Incredible Skills

Watch: Mexico City Protest Against American Ex-Pat 'Invasion' Turns Viole

Kazakhstan Just BETRAYED Russia - Takes gunpowder out of Putin’s Hands

Why CNN & Fareed Zakaria are Wrong About Iran and Trump

Something Is Going Deeply WRONG In Russia

329 Rivers in China Exceed Flood Warnings, With 75,000 Dams in Critical Condition

Command Of Russian Army 'Undermined' After 16 Of Putin's Generals Killed At War, UK Says

Rickards: Superintelligence Will Never Arrive

Which Countries Invest In The US The Most?

The History of Barbecue

‘Pathetic’: Joe Biden tells another ‘tall tale’ during rare public appearance

Lawsuit Reveals CDC Has ZERO Evidence Proving Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

Trumps DOJ Reportedly Quietly Looking Into Criminal Charges Against Election Officials

Volcanic Risk and Phreatic (Groundwater) eruptions at Campi Flegrei in Italy

Russia Upgrades AGS-17 Automatic Grenade Launcher!

They told us the chickenpox vaccine was no big deal—just a routine jab to “protect” kids from a mild childhood illness

Pentagon creates new military border zone in Arizona

For over 200 years neurological damage from vaccines has been noted and documented

The killing of cardiologist in Gaza must be Indonesia's wake-up call

Marandi: Israel Prepares Proxies for Next War with Iran?


Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: The Bill of Rights has been Revoked!
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://misguidedchildren.com/politi ... -rights-has-been-revoked/17959
Published: Apr 2, 2014
Author: Matthew Peavy
Post Date: 2014-04-02 23:47:20 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 278
Comments: 16

Posted by Matthew Peavy / March 31, 2014

bill of rights

Justice Sonia Sotomayer – dismantles the Bill of Rights

The Bill of Rights has been revoked!

While you were focused on the missing Airliner, there was a little case being heard in front of the Supreme Court called U.S. v. Castleman. The case was a landmark win for the gun control left wing, but what no one realized, is that our Constitution no longer affords us “rights.”

No longer rights that are inviolate

The case was decided March 28, 2014. The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the Bill of Rights is no longer made up of “Declaratory and Restrictive Clauses.” They are judicially now perceived as “privileges.” A “privilege” can be revoked for the slightest of legislative causes, but a “Right” is “Forever Inviolate” … We the People no longer have that.

U.S. vs Castleman

The case was about domestic violence, a cause we can all get behind. But, in the end, the Supreme Court has taken away not just domestic violence abuser’s right to bear arms, but all of the people, and in turn has made all of the Bill of Rights void, and made it a Bill of Privileges that can be revoked.

The Preamble states:

“The Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further Declaratory and Restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.”

While the Constitutional Conventions desired further declaratory and restrictive clauses, the Supreme Court has now taken our rights without anyone noticing and replaced them with privileges. It’s time to wake up America, first this year the NDAA gives Obama the power to arrest anyone without reason and detain them indefinitely. Now we have our Constitution shredded, and still we just move on like nothing has happened.

There is a movement in the country that is gaining momentum called the Constitutional Emergency. It may be our best hope at restoring the America we all loved. Patriots are needed and sacrifices will be made — – if you loved the way things used to be and the way the founders intended, check them out and pray that we that make the journey succeed. - See more at: http://misguidedchildren.com/politics/2014/03/the-bill-of-rights-has-been-revoked/17959#sthash.LtWmYTjj.dpuf

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

#2. To: christine (#0) (Edited)

While you were focused on the missing Airliner, there was a little case being heard in front of the Supreme Court called U.S. v. Castleman.

More high-level court matters with the name "Castleman" involved, Tennessee and elsewhere:

Digest of Decisions of the United States Courts - Google Books: Mechanical Appliance v. Castleman, [1909/1910?] | Mound City Co. v. Castleman, 1911

CASTLEMAN v. ROSS ENGINEERING INC, , December 22, 1997 - TN Supreme Court | FindLaw: Billy CASTLEMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant

supreme.courts.state.tx.us: 05-0189 Borg-Warner Corp.: Barry Castleman, Ph.D, expert asbestos witness, 2006

law.wlu.edu: In a Class by Themselves: A Proposal to Incorporate Tribal Courts into the Federal Court System Without Compromising Their Unique Status As "Domestic Dependent Nations", by R. Stephen McNeill; Pg. 7 of 63, Footnote 34: David A. Castleman, Comment, Personal Jurisdiction in Tribal Courts, 154 U. PA. L. REV. 1253, 1259 (2006). "Instead of following the familiar state-court judicial model, the existing framework determines tribal court jurisdiction depending on which classification the parties fall under: 'non-Indian, Indian nonmember, and member.'"34

Edited: link 1 info + punctuation.

GreyLmist  posted on  2014-04-03   20:19:00 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: All (#2)

Domestic violence existed when the Constitution was written and throughout world history long before that but our Founders did not make the 2nd Amendment conditional on it. The Judiciary's job isn't supposed to be social-engineering and endorsing or dodging issues of Unconstitutionality. They're supposed to be upholding our rights, not "color of law" infringements of them.

Archiving and recommending the discussions on this issue at these two links:

reddit.com: In a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court keeps guns away from those guilty of domestic violence : news; 100+ Comments

thehighroad.org: SCOTUS rules that you lose your gun rights after misd domestic - US v. Castleman; 2 pages currently

See also: the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the Lautenberg Amendment after the O.J. Simpson trials.

GreyLmist  posted on  2014-04-03   23:39:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: All (#4)

thehighroad.org: SCOTUS rules that you lose your gun rights after misd domestic - US v. Castleman; 2 pages currently

Comment excerpts:

"At work we won't even hire people with domestic abuse charges."

"if they are dangerous, lock them up, if they're safe enough to be out on the street, time served, Rights restored. Pretty soon almost EVERYTHING will be a felony that strips us of our Rights."

"I'll repeat what I've said for a decade, that Lautenberg and similar FED laws are an end around to gun control, with an aim to disarm all Americans."

"The 2nd amendment is hardly an inalienable right if you lose it the instant 'someone' thinks you should"

"I'm of the opinion that when the word 'misdemeanor' is included in the criminal descriptor, then by the very definition of the word, the crime in which it is associated with is MINOR. Therefore, I am also of the opinion that NO CRIME which can be described as 'minor' is worthy of denying someone a fundamental right for the rest of his/her life. [...] ALL THAT SAID... Castleman was NOT a case which should have gone before the Supreme Court. The law is fairly clear with respect to what constitutes physical force (nearly anything) and Castleman, for whatever reason, plead guilty to it. Once he did this, it was pretty much game over."

"Castelman plead guilty to domestic violence. Years later Castleman and wife were arrested on gun trafficing charges. The wife was buying the guns."

"I gave the ruling a cursory reading, and most of the discussion dealt with the level of violence that Castleman had pled guilty to, so it looked to me that they essentially said, 'We're not really going to draw a line in the sand just yet, but we do know that this guy crossed over it'"

"I also read that the SCOTUS position on this is that this is a 'regulatory' act and not a 'punishment'. Which, according to that aforementioned miniscule portion of my brain, is legal-speak for saying 'since it's not a punishment, it's A-OK'. [...] I take exception to this...how can revoking any fundamental right NOT be viewed as a punishment?"

"If you pled to driving 61 in a 55 zone in 1989 because you thought it'd be cheaper to do that than fight it, and your state tomorrow decided to retroactively revoke the RKBA [Right to Keep and Bear Arms] of anyone with a ticket on their record, wouldn't you consider that an ex post facto increasing the penalty after the fact? Would you have pled to the ticket if that penalty had been in place at the time?"

"back before the Lautenberg Amendment was enacted. People would plead guilty to such charges just to get the charges behind them. Little could they imagine the adverse consequences that would await them in the future. Whether or not this is technically an 'ex post facto' application, it's clearly a moral injustice. The lesson to be learned is to be very, very careful when choosing a domestic companion. Choose wrong, and you will be paying for the rest of your life, in many ways. Lautenberg was just the opening gambit in a strategy of whittling down gun rights by disqualifying one group after another. First it was the 'wife beaters,' now it's the 'mental defectives' (including, perhaps, veterans with post traumatic stress syndrome), and soon it may be anyone with a so-called 'mental defective' living in their household."

"the constitutionality of Lautenberg was not challenged by Castleman so the Court did not look at it. It is still open to a challange of constitutionality."

"Castleman was not a good case on which to challenge Lautenberg."

"that seems to be pretty much the bottom line. Castleman was not a good case with which to challenge the law."

"This was a terrible case to take to the USSC. Reading Justice Scalia's concurrence it is quite obvious that if we want to win this particular fight we need to take it to the state legislatures and have the laws on domestic violence changed so that they do not lump non-violent conduct in with violent conduct. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...-1371_6b35.pdf

"the more I think about it, I tend to agree; this ability to discern violence/non-violence is really an authority you want residing in locally-accountable officialdoms"

"Not long ago there was the case of Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005). It was a ruling on a technical point of eminent domain law (specifically involving the 'takings' clause of the Fifth Amendment applied to the States through the 14th Amendment and the meaning of 'public use'). The result (a very broad interpretation of 'public use') was found to be unsatisfactory by many. As a consequence, the legislatures of 42 States revised those States' eminent domain laws to avoid a Kelo result."

GreyLmist  posted on  2014-04-04   4:03:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 9.

#10. To: GreyLmist (#9)

GreyLmist: I take exception to this...how can revoking any fundamental right NOT be viewed as a punishment?"

YOU, and most Americans today HAVE NO RIGHTS despite your taking "exception" ... you waived your rights through membership in the Social Democracy and accepted the obligations of membership which include submission to regulatory statutes.

WAKE-UP !

noone222  posted on  2014-04-04 04:16:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 9.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]