Forwarded message:

Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 00:06:22 +1000 From: Reeza! <howree@cable.navy.mil> Subject: Re: IP: Clinton Wants Loophole In U.S. Free Speech Closed

Notice how, in each of the amendments below, the 1st is the only one with the text "congress shall make no law".

This is implied, understood to be implied, accepted as implied and supreme court ruled to be implied as applicable to each of the rest of the bill of rights, and later to the amendments, wherein it is not so specified as in the 1st.

A large part of the reason that 2 thru 10 and the rest do not include that phrase is to prevent the states from doing the very thing that congress was and is prohibited from.

Read the 10th again you don't understand what it is saying. It *specificaly* says that unless the Constitution assigns it to the feds *or* prohibits it then the states are *exactly* the ones that are able to do what Congress is prohibited from doing. The states are limited by their own consititions which are guaranteed to be representative in nature. The states absolutely have the right to regulate gun laws (as in the Texas constitution) provided they don't infringe (what part of shall not do you not understand) on the actual possession. Licenses and background checks at the state level are absolutely constitutional. State regulation on speech, press, etc. are also completely constitutional as well. And is where such regulation should take place. If you don't like your states laws move to one you do like. That's what it means to live in a democracy, freedom of choice - not homogeneity (on this point ol' Alex was wrong, wrong, wrong). ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------