who said we can't nullify federal law?

Threedee said:
I'm guessing because of LEOs who have declared they will not enforce federal gun laws that they consider unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

Yes, hardly relevant to the topic at hand.

There is an entire forum dedicated to kicking dead horses.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
who cares, Madison says we can.

http://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/01/31/james-madison-rebukes-nullification-deniers/

Thomas Jefferson said:

“… but where powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis,) to nullify of their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion, absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of judgment for them…” '6'

James Madison commented on the above:

“… the right of nullification meant by Mr. Jefferson is the natural right, which all admit to be a remedy against insupportable oppression…” '7'

6 The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798,8th Resolution.

7 Madison’s Notes on Nullification (1834). The quote is near the end. Use “find” function.
Click to expand...



what is the tread title?
 
Certainly, this being an STY thread, you kind of have to be thinking guns a little. However, there is a long history of nullification dating back before we had leftists, and hence never had to even discuss gun rights.
 
Threedee said:
Certainly, this being an STY thread, you kind of have to be thinking guns a little. However, there is a long history of nullification dating back before we had leftists, and hence never had to even discuss gun rights.
Click to expand...

No, this being an STY thread, you kind of have to be thinking liberty, of which guns are but a component.
 
Fair enough. I would prefer it be that way, anyway, but I do understand where Desh is coming from (and I don't always get where that is!).
 
Threedee said:
I believe both men later came to regret the resolutions, as they saw that they could be used to argue against any piece of unpopular legislation, and not simply major violations of civil liberties.
Click to expand...
notice that they felt that way once they became president and realized the limits placed upon them by that constitution.
 
So unfounded Jefferson quotes from decades before we became a nation justify nullification?

Not.

I'll say this again. We are the United States of America, led by a central government.
 
Howey said:
So unfounded Jefferson quotes from decades before we became a nation justify nullification?

Not.

I'll say this again. We are the United States of America, led by a central government.
Click to expand...

A government which has never passed an unjust law?

How do you feel about the Magna Carta?

Mohatma Gandi?
 
Rune said:
A government which has never passed an unjust law?

How do you feel about the Magna Carta?

Mohatma Gandi?
Click to expand...

What I feel about the Magna Carta or Ghandi is irrelevant.

The US constitution has the means to get rid of "unjust" laws.
 
Rune said:
Vinland is in America, dickhead but you wouldn't know that would you? and NOTHING you said was relevant.
Click to expand...
No No, you got it wrong, nothing MADISON says is relevant. You see, america is a democracy, where everybody over the age of 18, a citizen and of good character is allowed to vote, there's also one other condition that doesn't get talked about so much anymore, you have to be BREATHING. When somebody dies we take back their vote and their opinion becomes irrelevant.
 
Jury nullification is a great check on power. But it is not a sufficient replacement for judicial review.

How does jury nullification help a guy like Heller?
 
Disillusioned said:
No No, you got it wrong, nothing MADISON says is relevant.
Click to expand...
So in your opinion the constitution is irrelevant.
You see, america is a democracy,
Click to expand...
No, it is a Representative Republic, not a democracy.

where everybody over the age of 18, a citizen and of good character is allowed to vote, there's also one other condition that doesn't get talked about so much anymore, you have to be BREATHING. When somebody dies we take back their vote and their opinion becomes irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Again, you consider everything written by someone who is now dead to be irrelevant?
 
Disillusioned said:
No No, you got it wrong, nothing MADISON says is relevant. You see, america is a democracy, where everybody over the age of 18, a citizen and of good character is allowed to vote, there's also one other condition that doesn't get talked about so much anymore, you have to be BREATHING. When somebody dies we take back their vote and their opinion becomes irrelevant.
Click to expand...
I guess you're one of those individuals that doesn't know what a legal contract is, right?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
I guess you're one of those individuals that doesn't know what a legal contract is, right?
Click to expand...
A contract with who? Britain? Ourselves? The people who wrote it?

And can I insert how funny it is that the guy who thinks that laws can be ignored if you have a gun is lecturing me on legality?
 
Rune said:
So in your opinion the constitution is irrelevant. No, it is a Representative Republic, not a democracy.



Again, you consider everything written by someone who is now dead to be irrelevant?
Click to expand...

Read what I'm writing not what the voices in your head are telling you.

Yes, the writings of dead people are irrelevant, take your meaning and mysticism from them all you like but don't expect me to care who said it. A good argument is good no matter if it's a hobo from Georgia or the Pope making it. You can't just scream "Jefferson said I'm right" and actually think that it makes your points of value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top