Our government is tripolar by constitutional design.
Your idea about one person being in charge of everything...where does that come from?
BREAKING: ATF says most popular pistol braces "shouldering devices"
- Thread starter OKNewshawk
- Start Date
Your idea about one person being in charge of everything...where does that come from?
To start, the Constitution gives Congress the power to create law EXCLUSIVELY (Article I, Section 1). Congress has no authority to delegate this power and no other entity has been granted law making powers. The Constitution requires all bills to be passed in both houses and then signed into law by the President. In 1946 Congress and the President placed the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 into law. This law, labeled as a "procedures" act is false on it's face, and unconstitutional in its intent and execution. We have unelected agencies creating law, changing law, and prosecuting violations of these unconstitutional laws.
None of the people in these agencies are subject to election by the people. As near as I can tell, those agencies were created simply to put into law that which is unpopular and would not pass muster in the normal - ahem - the proscribed manner delineated in the Constitution. If such law was to be presented in Congress, many representatives and senators signing on to such law would not pass another election. As it stands, any "rule" created by any of these agencies can only be stopped if Congress passes a law saying "no" to it. As you can see, most of these rules go on to become law because Congress does not act to dismiss any such rule within the thirty day period between its final draft is published and then enacted. After that, Congress has to act to dismiss such a rule while in the mean time the rule gets enacted and people suffer. The Court can rule on the admissibility of any rule as well, but by the time it makes it to the Court, havoc will continue.
One of the "excuses" for these regulatory powers to have been delegated to these agencies was to lighten the load on Congress. Well, most of the agencies with the regulatory powers shouldn't exist to begin with! They infringe upon the powers reserved to the states or to the people! If all these unconstitutional agencies were to be abolished(as they should be), Congress would have all the time and resources necessary to legislate within the scope of powers set forth in the Constitution. As I often say, If the ends sought cannot be achieved through the means granted to the Federal Government in the Constitution, there is neither a need nor the power for the Federal Government to get involved.
Until all these unconstitutional agencies are eliminated along with the rules they have so flagrantly created, we will continue to suffer under these tyrannical dictatorships Congress created and allows to run amuck.
Source: Administrative Procedure Act of 1946
Woody
None of the people in these agencies are subject to election by the people. As near as I can tell, those agencies were created simply to put into law that which is unpopular and would not pass muster in the normal - ahem - the proscribed manner delineated in the Constitution. If such law was to be presented in Congress, many representatives and senators signing on to such law would not pass another election. As it stands, any "rule" created by any of these agencies can only be stopped if Congress passes a law saying "no" to it. As you can see, most of these rules go on to become law because Congress does not act to dismiss any such rule within the thirty day period between its final draft is published and then enacted. After that, Congress has to act to dismiss such a rule while in the mean time the rule gets enacted and people suffer. The Court can rule on the admissibility of any rule as well, but by the time it makes it to the Court, havoc will continue.
One of the "excuses" for these regulatory powers to have been delegated to these agencies was to lighten the load on Congress. Well, most of the agencies with the regulatory powers shouldn't exist to begin with! They infringe upon the powers reserved to the states or to the people! If all these unconstitutional agencies were to be abolished(as they should be), Congress would have all the time and resources necessary to legislate within the scope of powers set forth in the Constitution. As I often say, If the ends sought cannot be achieved through the means granted to the Federal Government in the Constitution, there is neither a need nor the power for the Federal Government to get involved.
Until all these unconstitutional agencies are eliminated along with the rules they have so flagrantly created, we will continue to suffer under these tyrannical dictatorships Congress created and allows to run amuck.
Source: Administrative Procedure Act of 1946
Woody
One things for sure, everyone knows who will rat who out in the end, and who will stand shoulder to shoulder and fight the fight, stand the ground and say no more.
when the rats are stuck to the same sticky trap as the other rats, they just start cannibalizing the other rats. It doesn't matter if they're a weak rat or or a strong rat. It only matters that they're a rat stranded differently situated in the glue. If you're a rat, other rats aren't exactly your enemies, they'er just going to eat you because they're hungry
If you respect the Constitution, you will follow the Constitution. Most of us swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. Until we have exhausted all the remedies outlined in the document we must continue to work within the Constitution to keep it true to its origin
I dont intend to let any rat make a meal out of me no matter how desperate they are to survive.
It didn't come from anywhere, you mis-read it. Some context would probably help as well.
Shouldering device? What's up with that?!?
My arms do all the shouldering I require. A pistol grip is not a shouldering device. A rifle stock is not a shouldering device.
I got out the most intelligent rifle and pistol I own, laid them on the table, and ordered them to shoulder. Neither one moved. Neither one even grunted in an attempt. They just laid there, dumb as a rock, totally immobile. Hell, these things can't even fire on their own! Not even aim themselves!
Sheesh. How are we supposed to abide some illegitimate(to say the least) edict from unelected illiterates? People who can't even compose a cogent thought into words the rest of the world understands? There should be at least one linguist in these agencies(even though they are unconstitutional).
Suppose I make a rifle with a stock that rests upon my shoulder instead of up against the front of it. Is it still a rifle? Couldn't I call it a pistol since it doesn't seat up against my shoulder and requires it to be totally controlled with one or two hands? I'd call it a brace, or balance beam, or a recoil absorber. I could fill it full of ammo and call it a magazine!
Woody
My arms do all the shouldering I require. A pistol grip is not a shouldering device. A rifle stock is not a shouldering device.
I got out the most intelligent rifle and pistol I own, laid them on the table, and ordered them to shoulder. Neither one moved. Neither one even grunted in an attempt. They just laid there, dumb as a rock, totally immobile. Hell, these things can't even fire on their own! Not even aim themselves!
Sheesh. How are we supposed to abide some illegitimate(to say the least) edict from unelected illiterates? People who can't even compose a cogent thought into words the rest of the world understands? There should be at least one linguist in these agencies(even though they are unconstitutional).
Suppose I make a rifle with a stock that rests upon my shoulder instead of up against the front of it. Is it still a rifle? Couldn't I call it a pistol since it doesn't seat up against my shoulder and requires it to be totally controlled with one or two hands? I'd call it a brace, or balance beam, or a recoil absorber. I could fill it full of ammo and call it a magazine!
Woody
