Another “ex post facto” law has to do with you being a prohibited possessor of a firearm if you ever have been convicted of domestic violence. This law was passed by Washington and struck down by the Court, once. Reasons: it was “ex post facto”, or it made a criminal out of someone for a prior conviction where the gun “crime” was not a law at the time of the charge; and it also resulted in a felony charge for a misdemeanor crime. After being struck down, it was inserted as an amendment to a funding bill (I think in 1997) and it has been on the books since then. It is clearly unconstitutional.
September 13, 2013 at 3:52am
Hey almighty one. You might see this a little different as to where our rights come from by also seeing the Constitution different. “We the People” established the federal government by writing and agreeing to the Constitution, which set up the government. Look at the first amendment. It does not give us the right to free speech, etc.; it makes it clear the government, which the people were establishing could not pass laws to interfere with our free speech. Freedom of speech, press, religion existed prior to the Constitution and the government. Same with second amendment. It is not granting a right to own a gun for whatever reason – they already owned guns, it is making it clear the new government was not granted the power to infringe on our pre-existing right to have a gun.
September 3, 2013 at 7:03pm
Short and to the point.
August 14, 2013 at 7:20pm
“30 million hundred-dollar notes” is 3B, not 30 B.
What can I say, I’m a numbers guy!
I was hoping i wasnt the only one that noticed that. Pretty simple calculation.
July 24, 2013 at 6:59pm
Enough talk! Break out the handcuffs and make an example of this guy. Stop messing around, trying to sound tuff and do something about it!
July 24, 2013 at 6:43pm
She might get their attention with a giant law suit. If I were the president of that bank, I would be furnishing her house with new furniture and sending her on vacation, the one of her choice, while we painted her home and replaced the carpet, etc. She should be getting the VIP treatment from this bank before she hires an attorney.
July 8, 2013 at 2:16pm
We are missing something as to the 4th Amendment. The Bill of Rights did not grant us these “rights”, we already had these rights. The Bill of Rights were added to make it clear to the government some of the things they cannot do to us. This was not an all-inclusive list. Telling the government that they cannot house troops in our homes without our consent is not a statement that then means that state or local troops (police) can do whatever they want. You have heard, “Life, Liberty, and Property”. This is a situation that affects all three of these unalienable rights.
July 4, 2013 at 4:01am
In Oklahoma! Have you ever heard of chiggers and no-see-ums? Hope they had a feast on this guy while he laid there in the grass. He should be itching for the next few days.
This guy’s picture (the homeowner) needs to be in the dictionary next to “Real Men”.
March 7, 2013 at 2:36pm
For the first time in my (recent) adult life, I am proud of our Senate (at least a handfull of them).
It warmed my heart to see someone actually stand up for what they believe. Thank you Mr. Smith II.