Richard A. Hamblen Challenges the Feds to Uphold Constitutional Rights

When at their Nashville meetup the http://motorhomediaries.com crew had the pleasure of meeting Richard A. Hamblen who shared a story about his actions (purchasing firearms) that resulted in the involvement of the ATF, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court and a prison sentence.

Richard notes that his case is "obstensibly about guns" it's really about "the Constitution and the utter contempt in which the Federal Government holds it."

For more about this, check out http://www.esnips.com/web/HamblenvsUnitedStates.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• atf
• bill of rights
• constitution
• constitutional rights
• heller
• heller vs dc
• MHD
• motorhome diaries
• motorhomediaries.com
• nashville
• private property
• richard a hamblen
• second amendment
• self-ownership
• tax
• tennessee national guard
• us vs miller

[justaman6972]

Section 2. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights.Arizona Constitution and most others have this same clause in it. SO if you don't agree with a statute then DO NOT CONSENT AND WAIVE THE BENEFIT.Statutes are not law they are legislative enactments given the force of law by the consent of the governed. Not LAW!!!

[justaman6972]

Mudook v. Penn. : 319 US 105 (1943) and Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Al.: 373 US 262 (1962) The Govt. cannot take a right charge a fee and issue a license for it in the first case and if they do use the second case which say if the state does this you can ignore the license and fee and continue the act with impunity.United States v. Bishop 412 US 346 (1973):Sets the standard for criminal violation of Willful Intent1.they must prove you are the party,you had method and opportunity&acted willful

[tkcarr]

@fresniak The constitution is a piece of paper and you cannot ask it anything. And no I would never ask YOU to decide such as you don't even understand what the rule of law is. Therefore we must ask a much more learned and principled group than you and your anarchist pals. That would be the court. You and your other buddy would be kangaroo court. Suitable only for lynching.

[tkcarr]

@fresniak No the courts decide whether a law violates the constitution as well. That is called constituional law. Criminal law is not the only purpose of the courts. Are you really this uninformed?

[tkcarr]

@fresniak Because the fed did NOTHING to stop it. They are not a central bank either. Before the regulation of money we had boom and bust constantly. No I am not happy with the current crisis but that was also caused by too little government not too much. The PEOPLE you keep talking about caused it thru greed. You are using bad language again and need to wahs your mouth out with soap.

[fresniak]

@tkcarr "They don't want another depression." the depression in 29 was caused by the fed, Milton Friedman himself said that and it's now a well known fact. Only the central bank can cause such kind of recessions, because they can make the money scarce or plenty. How about the current crisis, unemployment hits 16% are you happy with the banks? Of course you are, probably you're the son of one of those motherfuckers.

[tkcarr]

@fresniak WHO DECIDES LAWS ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL?????? WHO INTERPRETS THE CONSTITUTION???

[tkcarr]

@fresniak And who the heck decides what is unconstitutional? I keep asking this and you have no answer.

[tkcarr]

@fresniak Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, Adams, Washington. Yeah OK I will take those. Who do you have? Ron Paul? ROFL!!!!!!!!!!

[fresniak]

@tkcarr "HE COURTS DECIDE LAW" the courts decide whether a law has been violated or not. IT does not write the law, and the constitution is a law by itself, the court should not rewrite it you're incredibly confused and stubbornly ignorant.