Perhaps we should get started...with a Constitutional Amendment to overturn anti-gun legislation

[Birddog1911]

I was thinking this morning on the way to work. I really hope that these moronic laws don't get passed, but if they should, could a constitutional ammendment overturn them? I know we've got some really smart people on this board; I think we need a constitutional ammendment proposed and on the ballot next year that would prohibit ANY restrictive anti-gun laws, and reverse any that are on the books when (and if) passed.

Moving isn't an option for me any time soon, so I have to stay and fight. I'm just trying to come up with ways to prevent, or overturn, this insanity.

[CO303]

This is the right approach. Don't get me wrong, I'm al for dressing up like indians and taking over the capital, riding them out on a rail, or the truely timeless tar and feathers. I think a constitutional amendment by petiton is our best and most lasting recourse.

[BushMasterBoy]

If a bunch of pot heads can legalize marijuana, I'm sure that we can get the masses to reinforce constitutionally the states gun rights. I can't see the politicians going against the will of the people in this state. Maybe the metro area is different, I don't live there...

[brobar]

I hope, along with such an amendment, that we could get an amendment that holds the owners of an area designated as "gun free" responsible for the lives and well-being of those that they just disarmed. Unenforced gun-free zones are dangerous and puts people lives at risk. I want any place (be it a school, a theater, a mall, a college) who designates their place as a gun-free zone to be financially responsible for any lives lost due to crime at that location. They should have three choices... 1) make their gun-free zone an ENFORCED gun-free zone. The only way you can enforce a gun-free zone is through ARMED security manning metal detectors and making sure every single person who enters the premise goes through that security. 2) They can take out additional insurance for the sole purpose of paying for medical bills to those who are injured (who couldn't protect themselves) or the families of those whose loved ones died (because they couldn't protect themselves). Or option 3) They can allow people to be responsible for their own security and allow concealed carry.

Nobody should be able to disarm a group of citizens in a confined area and then not be responsible for the security of the people they disarmed!!!

[Ronin13]

I guess I can put my proposal here- I just posted this on FB and hope to maybe inspire something... this is not a state measure but a federal measure:

Here is what I propose: the 29th Amendment to the US Constitution- The Constitutional Reaffirmation Act. Not in actual Constitutional law speak, but it covers what it is. Hereby, effective retroactively to 1791, congress can make no law that hinders, infringes, or limits in any way, shape or form any of the Bill of Rights, and such act is no less than treason, punishable by death. Furthermore, any act, law, or ordinance that currently infringes, hinders, or limits any of the Bill of Rights, hereby is null and void.

Included in this act will be: National Firearms Act of 1934, The Gun Control Act of 1968, Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, The Patriot Act of 2001, the National Defense Authorization Act, and any other act that violates the 29th Amendment/Bill of Rights shall be null and void.


Now, what you're thinking... "Holy crap, that would make grenade launchers, machine guns, and other 'weapons of war' legal!" Yes, you are correct. But it would also instill constitutional carry and allow every law-abiding citizen to freely own whatever they wanted pending passing of a background check and if they can afford it. "But what about people running around with rocket launchers? They can use machine guns to commit crimes!" Well, easy answer to that- CRIMES ARE ALREADY ILLEGAL- What does it matter if you commit robbery or murder with a machine gun? Robbery and murder are already illegal! So why limit and hinder those of us who aren't committing crimes? The Second Amendment (the main point of this proposed act) states very clearly "The right of the people (found by the Supreme Court to mean 'the individual') to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." That can be interpreted pretty easily- not infringed in any way. The above acts and laws that will become null and void are nothing short of unconstitutional infringement upon the 2nd Amendment and hereby illegal.

[freqlord]

^ amen brother, amen

[Zundfolge]

Ronin, your idea isn't bad but it won't get anywhere.


However we CAN get a state Constitutional amendment on the ballot and I bet it would get significantly more signatures than it needs (Just needs 86,105 signatures to get on the ballot). Like BushMasterBoy said it, if a bunch of potheads can do it why can't we?

Here's the process

[Ronin13]

Ronin, your idea isn't bad but it won't get anywhere.


However we CAN get a state Constitutional amendment on the ballot and I bet it would get significantly more signatures than it needs (Just needs 86,105 signatures to get on the ballot). Like BushMasterBoy said it, if a bunch of potheads can do it why can't we?

Here's the process

Then perhaps start it out at the State level and see if it catches on? Like you both are stating, the pot heads did it, it might spread to other states soon, this could work as well.

[ColoFarmer]

And make it simple, something along the lines of anyone instituting or enforcing any unconstitutional laws are subject to felony charges.

We could get the pothead vote (honor their amendment), few other fringe groups, then use it to defend Arcticle 2 Section 13...

[Birddog1911]

Hmm, I was reading the link provided by Zundfolge, and noticed that it says that Colorado citizens have the power to repeal legisilation via veto refererendum. Perhaps this should be a two-part process; constitutional ammendment on one hand, and VR the laws if they get passed.