« Is Pres. Obama changing his view of gun laws? | Main | Effect of the presidency on US Court of Appeals composition »
Firearm advice for potential adoptive parents
Here, at Ammo.com. Apparently, at least two States require potential parents to sign agreements as to how they store their guns; one of them also regulates carrying and the other wants unannounced home inspections to enforce the agreement.
3 Comments | Leave a comment
Unfortunately, the Founders were not omniscient, and left a loophole in the 4th Amendment: "reasonable"
They did not realize that the American people were subject to progressive stupidity.
The word "reasonable" is NOT alone in the 4th. The 4th's grammar specifically requires a warrant for ALL searches and seizures to be reasonable. The comma, rather than a semicolon, between the clauses dictates that the clauses are dependent on each other, not independent, and thus for any search/seizure to be reasonable there must be a warrant supported by probable cause [probable cause alone is not sufficient for a search/seizure] supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. [Note:the requirements to be VERY specific in the descriptions of the things and persons. For example a warrant for a computer truly needs to specify the particular (meaning exact) information, not just "the computer" or "any and all computers".] The grammar of the 4th does not allow for any other legitimate understanding of the 4th.
The reason we see police using just the "probable cause" portion is that in 1833 the SC decided the Bill of Rights had no bearing on the States. Then in the 20th century, the SC began inventing the relationships between the BoR and the States by twisting the 14th amendment which BTW does not cover Rights, just privileges and immunities (another topic), and the 14th didn't even cover universal suffrage as evidenced by the 15th and 19th amendments. The SC has simply lied about the extent of the 14th in order to remake society in THEIR vision.
Those who make other claims about the meanings of specific words or clauses do so by ignoring the English language and twisting the words in order to invent a meaning they prefer. The who attempt to selectively pull "probable cause" or "reasonable" out of the entire 4th have an agenda and are like those who pull biblical quotes out of context trying to prove a point.
One can follow standard rules of language or one can manipulate things to change the meaning to whatever one desires and be wrong. What we have are ignorant people, dishonorable judges, folks with an agenda to expand the power of the federal government.
As put by Locke: "For what is the point of drawing up dumb, silent statements of laws, if anybody may attach a new meaning to the words to suit his own taste, find some remote interpretation, and twist the words to fit the situation and his own opinion?"
Blackstone gave us evidence that decisions of the People are superior to even the highest judiciary rather than the lie that the SC has the final say:
For whenever a question arises between the society at large and any magistrate vested with powers originally delegated by that society, it must be decided by the voice of the society itself: there is not upon earth any other tribunal to resort to.
Sir William Blackstone, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, Book I, Chp3, pg.205/6
Those in charge of inculcating societal values have selectively chosen NOT to teach the historical facts but to use the system to usurp power and control the people.
My advice: Move. To hell with busybodies who are control freaks. We have enough of these already. We call them the federal government. I truly love how those we elect to serve us immediately turn to "protecting" us. I also love how judges seemingly can see extra text in the Constitution that allows the government to violate the simple, straightforward text. Yeah. Somewhere in there is "compelling government interest". BS. Should we be concerned about who adopts whom? Yes. Maybe adoptive parents should have to have cameras implanted and be monitored 24/7. Maybe we all need to be "protected" like this. Oh, I forgot, the government is already monitoring everything we see, do and say. Of course somewhere the government failed to understand simple English grammar especially in Amdmt 4 which REQUIRES a warrant for ANY and ALL searches and seizures, NO EXCEPTIONS GRANTED TO THE GOVERNMENT.