In the coming battle for the 2nd Amendment, keep this Marine front and center as much as possible!
This is the U.S. Marine – Cpl. Joshua Boston – who wrote the now viral letter to Democrat Sen. Diane Feinstein telling her she is overstepping her domain by trying to infringe on the 2nd Amendment Rights of Americans. Boston was on CNN today, where he clearly dumbfounded the host with his strong defense of the 2nd Amendment. When asked what he would do if Feinstein’s gun ban were to become law, he said:
“Unconstitutional laws aren’t laws.”
I agree with the Marine: If it doesn’t follow the Constitution, it’s not a law.
Yep, I also agree with this marine. Me, being a non-violent felon is not supposed to even be in possession of a gun/firearm – do these lawmakers think that these crooked laws are not going to have a guy to start devising unconventional weapons that are a hell of a lot deadlier than any gun on the market?, and I mean military or non-military weapons.
+1
Ill stand beside you brother
The law is the law…
Same thought process that the millions who have been massacred by governments before us followed.
What a bunch of crap.
Can someone please wipe that hideous grin off of that blond dumbass reporter’s face. She’s got that wise ass two-faced smirk/grin that only makes you more angry as it is a way for her to provoke and intimidate the person she is talking to. However, it doesn’t seem to work for this marine and it won’t work for a majority of the patriots.
Her lines,
“Well, there’s some confusion there about what he said…”
“What happens if that law becomes passed? Are you going to break that law?”
WHAT A F**KING BITCH!!! Someone needs to bitchslap that woman back to the land of Oz and I’d be happy to do it for her.
Of course, what do you expect from CNN, AKA “Cia News Network”, AKA “Communist News Network”.
I also wanted to reach through the screen and smack the smirk off her smug little face when she said, “The law is the law…”
These propagandists are smug now, but they have no idea of the pandora’s box their paymasters are opening up for them.
Yea NC, I know what you are talking about. I always thought the Bill of Rights were perfectly loud and clear, plain and simple – especially the 1st. and the 2nd. ones. And that interviewer was talking about breaking F`n the law!?! lol.
Natural law is superior to Constitutional law,as the Constitution so beautifully relays to those who would rather decry that judges and congress and presidents decree to them what their rights are.Unconstitutional law truly is not law.I’m tryin’ my best to keep it short.Spend one hour of your life to read”The Law” by Frederic Bastiat and a bit more by another damned fool like Lysander Spooner and somehow even the best posts by the most well-intended fools(I come to mind)come across as mundane.Like we only wish to bitch about the flood while never addressing the cause of the high water.Freedom,my friends,is ours from creation and only so valuable as we choose to make it.Very much like money.
Quit watching this garbage labeled ‘NEWS’. I have yet to see anything of substance come from these governmental mouth pieces except for pissing people off. Intentional agitation is part of their script.
As for the U.S. Marines’ reply; he’s correct. Being correct doesn’t stop these Treasonous B@stards, though. Rope neckties and beheadings do.
I liked his demeanor.
He didn’t let that little media whore rattle him, much as she tried to.
“I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. What I can do, I should do and, with the help of God, I will do!”
-Everett Hale
I agree with the Marine.
The Constitution by itself is as defenceless as a little child in a TSA line.
Its up to the Adults in the line to make sure that Perverted TSA Smuck doesn’t desecrate its innocence.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/0sNWbiAMf80
What this article,and the Marine,fail to address is this:
Jews and Jewish organizations lead the gun control campaign
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2013/01/jews-and-jewish-organizations-lead-the-gun-control-campaign/
You can`t begin to fix a problem until you have identified and put a name to it.
I agree except the part where he says ” Granted BY the Constitution”, the Constitution only lets the Government and the rest of the world know our God given rights. The Constitution does NOT protect us, we’re to protect our freedom and the Constitutional guarantees!
The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.
** SPREAD THIS TO EVERYONE **
The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army.
The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.
The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.
The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion).
These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.
Attorney General Wickersham advised President Taft, “the Organized Militia (the National Guard) can not be employed for offensive warfare outside the limits of the United States.”
The Honorable William Gordon, in a speech to the House on Thursday, October 4, 1917, proved that the action of President Wilson in ordering the Organized Militia (the National Guard) to fight a war in Europe was so blatantly unconstitutional that he felt Wilson ought to have been impeached.
During the war with England an attempt was made by Congress to pass a bill authorizing the president to draft 100,000 men between the ages of 18 and 45 to invade enemy territory, Canada.
The bill was defeated in the House by Daniel Webster on the precise point that Congress had no such power over the militia as to authorize it to empower the President to draft them into the regular army and send them out of the country.
The fact is that the President has no constitutional right, under any circumstances, to draft men from the militia to fight outside the borders of the USA, and not even beyond the borders of their respective states.
Today, we have a constitutional LAW which still stands in waiting for the legislators to obey the Constitution which they swore an oath to uphold.
Charles Hughes of the American Bar Association (ABA) made a speech which is contained in the Appendix to Congressional Record, House, September 10, 1917, pages 6836-6840 which states:
“The militia, within the meaning of these provisions of the Constitution is distinct from the Army of the United States.” In these pages we also find a statement made by Daniel Webster, “that the great principle of the Constitution on that subject is that the militia is the militia of the States and of the General Government; and thus being the militia of the States, there is no part of the Constitution worded with greater care and with more scrupulous jealousy than that which grants and limits the power of Congress over it.”
“This limitation upon the power to raise and support armies clearly establishes the intent and purpose of the framers of the Constitution to limit the power to raise and maintain a standing army to voluntary enlistment, because if the unlimited power to draft and conscript was intended to be conferred, it would have been a useless and puerile thing to limit the use of money for that purpose.
Conscripted armies can be paid, but they are not required to be, and if it had been intended to confer the extraordinary power to draft the bodies of citizens and send them out of the country in direct conflict with the limitation upon the use of the militia imposed by the same section and article, certainly some restriction or limitation would have been imposed to restrain the unlimited use of such power.”
The Honorable William Gordon
Congressional Record, House, Page 640 – 1917