Constitution under attack: Chicago ban on handguns upheld by court

A Chicago ordinance banning handguns and automatic weapons within city limits was upheld on Tuesday by the U.S. Court of Appeals. The three-judge panel said the U.S. Constitution's Second Amendment did not apply to state and municipalities.

So, exactly what does this mean? Does the Constitution of the United States of America not apply at all? There are 50 states in the union, one would say 57 (ahem, Obama).

There is a good thing that there is a group called the National Rifle Association that is appealing this court's decision to the United States Supreme Court. I just hope Judge Sonia Sotomayor isn't there to ban guns outright.

I am all for States' Rights, but this is unbelieavable. Actually, this isn't even a States' Rights issue, it's a Chicago issue, but the court had to thrown in "did not apply to state and municipalities."

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution clearly states: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

IT HAS BEEN INFRINGED!!!

If a court can take away the Second Amendment, what can stop them from taking away more rights?

IN THE NEWS:
Bloomberg: Chicago Law Banning Handguns in City Upheld by Court

Homeland Security: Conservatism is more dangerous than Al-Qaeda

In a statement that shocks no one, the Obama team has declared war on conservatism. To be more correct, they call it "right wing extremist activity." The Department of Homeland Security says that the election of America's first black president and the return of a few disgruntled war veterans could swell the ranks of white-power militias. A footnote said that "rightwing extremism" also includes groups that reject federal authority in favor of state or local activity.

So, according to the Department of Homeland Security, all the people who will take part in the tea parties tomorrow are extremists as well as the governors who are not accepting portions of the stimulus bill. Texas Gov. Rick Perry must be an extremist leader because he talked about states' rights today.

Since when does the federal government have control over the states. I know each state is within the borders of the Unites States, but there is a thing called the Constitution that many have just forgotten about.

The not surprising part of the study is that it offers no numbers. There is no proof in what it says. It just says it. That's it.

IN THE NEWS:
The Washington Times: Federal agency warns of radicals on right
World Net Daily: Homeland Security on guard for 'right-wing extremists'
AFP: US recession, 1st black president, 'fuel extremism'
Reuters: Recession fueling right-wing extremism, U.S. says

Texas to Washington: Don't mess with Texas

Texas Gov. Rick Perry apparently has seen enough. He is tired of the U.S. government controlling all aspects of the state of Texas. Today he joined Rep. Brandon Creighton and sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 50 in support of states' rights under the 10th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

He said:
“I believe that our federal government has become oppressive in its size, its intrusion into the lives of our citizens, and its interference with the affairs of our state,” Gov. Perry said. “That is why I am here today to express my unwavering support for efforts all across our country to reaffirm the states’ rights affirmed by the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I believe that returning to the letter and spirit of the U.S. Constitution and its essential 10th Amendment will free our state from undue regulations, and ultimately strengthen our Union.”

Could this be signaling that Texas believes it can deal with its own problems without Washington? I don't think this is a threat of secession, but at least they know their rights. Will other states follow?



IN THE NEWS:
Office of the Governor Rick Perry: Gov. Perry Backs Resolution Affirming...