From iGeek
Icon of the Egyptian law.png
By :  Aristotle Sabouni
This section is about laws, legal, court rulings.

The law is a rule and the point where one group of people thinks another should sacrifice their liberty, property or life, if they don't comply. "Do what I say, or else I'll rob, imprison or kill you!"... or more often, have some authority (government thug) do it for them. The red line.

Laws • [22 items]

Laws • [22 items]

Roe v. Wade
Roe v. Wade fits my personal beliefs (1st Trimester legal, 3rd illegal, 2nd states rights). But it was a lousy and Unconstitutional ruling that invented law from the bench, imagining powers in the 14th (100 years after the fact) that the authors and ratifiers disagreed with. It violated the 10th and 11th. It polarizing us. And it stopped abortions legal growth.
2nd Amendment was for muskets
A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed ~ 2nd Amendment, Bill of Rights. Well regulated means, "in working order". Militia means "all able body males". And the National guard wasn't created until 1903 - so was not vaguely what the founders were referring to.
Corporate Personhood & Citizens United
Many on the left claim that Citizens United created/invented Corporate Personhood, and that this makes Corporations People, and this new power puts our political system "up for sale". They're wrong on all counts. It just said that Unions, Government, Churches, businesses, marriages and other "corporations", would all be treated the same. The lying left hates that.
Eighth Amendment
Constitution of the United States, page 1.jpg
The founding fathers and all judges for 200 years agreed that capital punishment wasn't cruel and certainly not unusual. Then in 1972 the far left invented it's arbitrary application as evidence it was (and a violation of the 8th Amendment). This was reversed 4 years later, after 37 states had plugged any legal holes about it's arbitrary application.
First Amendment
Constitution of the United States, page 1.jpg
The left loves Free Speech and Freedom of Religion, unless it's "Hate Speech" or "Disinformation", which is anything they disagree with. Or Christian displays, prayer in school, corporations supporting the other side in political ads, disagreeing with Global Warming, admitting Islamic Terrorists exists, or that Chromosomes define gender not feelings, and so on.
Fourth Amendment
Constitution of the United States, page 1.jpg
Democrats/left hate the 2A, so they're willing to sacrifice all our other civil rights (and bill of rights) including the 4th. The 4th protects against illegal search and seizures by requiring probable cause. But "Red Flag" laws and "no fly lists", both violate the 6th and 4th in some seriously questionable ways. Any anonymous claim, and you're out of luck.
Illinois SB0173
A good gun law? I'm pleasantly surprised. This law requires mandatory firearm knowledge before legislators can introduce firearm related legislation. What a novel idea!
Some have called me a xenophobic racist. I love immigrants, am one (1st, 2nd and 3rd generation immigrant), my friends, coworkers, students, teachers and partners have been as well. But all immigrants are not equal, and a nation without borders is no longer a functioning nation. Those that want to eliminate the border, also want to eliminate America.
James Mitose
James Mitose was an Japanese American that learned the hard way about our legal system and how the public views Martial Artists. He is well known in some Martial Arts circles, because he brought Kenpo/Kempo over to Hawaii and the mainland from Japan, and is one of the important Masters of the art.
Just Ban Assault Rifles
Anyone that says any variant of "Just ban assault rifles", "no one should own military grade weapons", or "it's not all guns, just these killing machines" shows they are completely ignorant about guns, assault rifles, or bans. (Not to mention the constitution). This article breaks down why you can't ban "Assault Rifles", and why it would be moronic to try.
Legality of Iraq war
No war is legal or illegal, there's only moral or immoral -- and all wars are immoral (some just more than others), the only real issue is whether the war is more immoral than doing nothing. Now as for legal justification, there was more justification for the Iraq War than most of the wars we got into.
Living Document
Living Document.png
Around 1900, Harvard and other progressives re-imagined Contract Law and the Constitution as a "Living Document". In other words, "Legal documents have no fixed meaning, and can be altered without the consent of either party, in order to meet the political whims of subsequent generations". aka 9 progressives can reimagine the Constitution into whatever suits them.
Microstamping was a moronic attempt to outlaw guns, with no positive upside. California figures if you can't outlaw something, you can still put impossible regulations on it to illegally achieve the same ends: enter micro-stamping. It was blocked because it couldn't be done, and wouldn't work if it could. But the idiot-left still tried. Proving their unreasonableness.
No Fly Lists for gun owners
The left demands that we close the “insane” loophole that allows people on the No Fly List to buy guns. And goes so far as to call it “insane” that we allow it. The problem is that the error rate on that list is high, and there's never been a mass shooter on the list.
Nuclear Option
The "Nuclear Option" (aka Filibuster Rules) was tradition since 1806. The Senate said there was no time limit on debate, so that a Senator could stand on principles (or duty) to prevent bad law from getting enacted, by debating it to death (called the filibuster). This guaranteed that new laws would have to have super-majority support. Democrats broke the tradition, and shot themselves in the foot.
Reasonable Gun Laws
Noun Justice 2332579.svg
There’s an oft repeated fallacy that “all we want it a few more ‘reasonable’ gun laws” but (insert either the NRA, evil republicans, gun-nuts), won’t be reasonable. So let's talk about "what's reasonable", and explain some of the complexities that the reasonable laws on the books already look like, to understand why some are so hesitant to ask for more.
Red Flag Laws
Red Flag laws sound reasonable (flag people that are threats, and take their guns away temporarily), but they aren't implemented that way. Everywhere it's been tried, it's been abused and gotten people killed. If you can't implement it in a way where it wouldn't be abused by other individuals or government, then how is it reasonable?
Rifle, Pistol or SBR
There’s a fallacy that “all we want is ‘reasonable’ gun laws”, then we look at the 20,000 gun laws and find few that work. An SBR (Short Barrelled Rifle) is considered more dangerous than a pistol or a rifle, and a felony to own, unless you pay $200 for a Tax Stamp, then it's safe again. Is that reasonable?
Second Amendment
Constitution of the United States, page 1.jpg
America was founded on, "Guns are liberties teeth". Governments are empowered by men to protect men. If governments don't trust the public to protect themselves, then the government isn't serving the people any more, and is the problem. The gun-controllers is exactly the kind of corrupt leadership that the Second Amendment was written to protect against.
Sixth Amendment
Constitution of the United States, page 1.jpg
Red Flag Laws are in direct conflict with the Constitution/Sixth Amendment. Secret hearings to strip you of your rights, based on shoddy or made-up evidence, and you don't need due process, or to face your accuser, when it comes to boom sticks, because they're scary? Democrats are all in. People that defend the constitution/law of the land are horrified.
Supreme Court
Supreme Court of the U.S. Building.jpg
There are two truths about the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS): (1) That it was a great idea, and copied by many since (2) That Democrats have tried to corrupt it, abuse it or undermine it since it's creation. Depending on whether SCOTUS was furthering or undermining their agenda of taking power away from the states and people, and giving it to the elites.
⅗ths clause
You often hear about the 3/5ths claus; "Blacks were only 3/5ths of a human being". But that were negotiating how to get rid of slavery with a system where Congressional votes were based on population. Since they didn't want to overpower the slave states by counting their population 1:1 (5/5ths), they diluted it to 3/5ths to reduce the influence of the South/Southern States


🔗 More[edit source]

Main Page
The root of all evil... and the home page for this website.
Something that is true, provable, demonstrable or verifiable.

🔗 External Links

[[Category:Main Page]][[ Category:Facts]]

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.