Thanks!!

And yes it would..

**********************************

**********************************************

Re: There is No “But” in “Shall Not Be Infring....

Please post this reply.

I have to ask; Why all of this talk calling for people to support and defend the Second Amendment? Wouldn't it be better to simply "INVOKE" the Second Amendment whenever someone in government tries to infringe upon your recognized God given Right that is in fact also a constitutionally protected Right ... Because after all, is it not the case that the Second Amendment is still the "Supreme Law of the Land"?

In the last century we saw the government ban alcohol with the 18th Amendment and which as a result made Prohibition the Supreme Law of the Land. And afterwards when enough people decided that Prohibition on alcohol had been a big mistake, they took the necessary and constitutionally required steps to repeal Prohibition by passing the 21st Amendment as this change could NOT have come about by simply passing an act of Congress or with a Presidential Executive order and in fact required the passage of another constitutional amendment in order to "lawfully" change the provisions of the 18th Amendment and to put to end the era of Prohibition.

Now unless it was done in complete secrecy and without letting anybody know about it, the provisions and the commandment directives of the Second Amendment have never been changed or altered and so the Second Amendment stands as originally written, and as originally written, "the Right of the people to keep and bear arms Shall Not be infringed" remains as the Supreme Law of the Land. Please also note that the wording used of "Shall Not" is a "command" and directed at government.

In addition, because the Constitution is a compact (a contract or agreement) and under accepted contract law all amendments to a contract permanently alters and changes the provisions of the original document due to the fact that an amendment to a contract overrides and always "supersedes" the original document. And so even though the government (incorrectly and falsely) relies on the so called Supremacy Clause and the Commerce Clause in the Constitution to assert their authority to regulate firearms, even if the original document somehow actually granted them that authority, it would not matter because the Second Amendment overrides and supersedes all of the provisions and statements in the original document. And so unless and until such time as another amendment is passed that specifically addresses the provisions of the Second Amendment, this amendment stands as originally written and neither the Congress, nor the President nor the Supreme Court can alter or change its wording or its meaning or subject it to other interpretations... especially since the Second Amendment is the only amendment that states within itself the reason for its existence and is so clearly written that it provides a very clear and concise command directive to the government that "the Right of the people to keep and bear arms Shall Not be infringed".

It is high time that we demand that all government people that swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution and then support attacks upon the Constitution of these United States of America be charged with violating their oath of office and possibly also with committing an act of treason.

*******************************