Yes.
No.
I'm against it simply because its not needed. We already have a nullification amendment. Its called the Tenth Amendment. That people don't use their power is the issue, not the need for another useless amendment.
They don't use this power because they are being LIED to by the judges who tell them they have NO right to judge the law only the facts of the case.Originally Posted by PierzStyx
I think I heard something about this. I hope a fully informed jury bill passes in every state. In fact, I'd love the judge to have to inform the jury and the defense to be able to inform the jury with lots of leeway to use examples. A man can dream, can't he?
Lifetime member of more than 1 national gun organization and the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance. Part of Young Americans for Liberty and Campaign for Liberty. Free State Project participant and multi-year Free Talk Live AMPlifier.
Yeah! I think the Judge must be ordered, by law, to say:
You, the jurors, have the right and responsibility to judge BOTH the law and the facts in the case before you, and it is your duty to acquit the defendant and find him/her not guilty, if you feel that the law is unjust, unfair, inapplicable or unconstitutional.
Tom Woods Nullification Documentary Wins at Film Festival
Nullification The Rightful Remedy - Full
Jury imposition is a bulwark against tyranny in defense of Liberty.
Judge Napolitano on Nullification and the Constitutional Powers of States
Note:
Definitions 1, 2, and 4 are negative. Definition 3, is the very definition of Freedom. And it is the 3rd definition of the word that applies to Napolitano.an·ar·chy
[an-er-kee] Show IPA
noun
1. a state of society without government or law.
2. political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control: The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.
3. a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.
4. confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.
The better word, of course, is Liberty, since the 3rd definition is not widely known.
Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 09-05-2012 at 11:01 AM.
Thomas Woods:
Nullification a Tool We All Have
He should be in stand up. Nice!
Are the voters in legal terms "the People"? I ask this because I am not so sure that the voters are according to the constitution are "the People". People correct me if this understanding I have come to is incorrect.
When court cases are prosecuted they are done so by the state aka "the People".
Now the voters elect many government officials but then the officials become "the People"
I believe according to the Constitution the voters are called "citizens" that would be the ones who vote. The ones who do not vote are just out their in limbo land or something? Am I right or wrong? Someone please clear this up for me.
The State is NOT the people. The people are just that, all the individuals who live in the country. The State (as it is now) is a parasite upon the people. The State (as it is now) is organized crime. Why? Because they violate the Non Aggression Principle. So, thus, they are the criminals.
Irrelevant to the point. With the internet education on the issue is easy to obtain.
How exactly is it irrelevant to the point? Do you not think that if people's right to nullify will be spelled out in the supreme legislation of the land it will HELP in educating them? The most important things must be on the surface, readily available to dispel deception perpetrated by the crooked judges. Truth must prevail this way.
Besides, the tenth amendment is LESS strong, than the correct principle I am proposing here.
Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 10-11-2012 at 06:30 PM.
Then why do they call themselves "the People" in court?The State is NOT the people.
Because they are liars.
Surprised?
I am talking about legal terms yes I know they are lairs. Are you are lawyer?
Do I sound like one?
No you don't that is why I asked I think it is a question for a lawyer.
A lawyer will say: "The government signs as 'The People' because you voted it in, therefore they are representing you." This is, of course, is a pile of manure, because no one has the right to represent me without my EXPLICIT permission, and neither I, nor MOST of the people in the country gave them that permission. Therefore they are usurpers and liars. (Or should I say liawyers?) Nothing new here.
Besides, "The People" means something only when PUBLIC property is involved. It means exactly NOTHING when PRIVATE property is involved, and none of the people has a just claim to it. "The People" have nor moral right to violate the property of even ONE individual.
Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 10-13-2012 at 02:25 PM.
I believe the reason why the state calls themselves "the people" is due to representation. The state represents the people (in their little minds lol). Usually, however, they say government, or the state rather than the people.
Indianensis Universitatis Alumnus
Thomas Jefferson’s Other Declaration
In 1798 Thomas Jefferson secretly drafted another declaration few know about...
by Derek Sheriff
Most Americans know that Thomas Jefferson was the principal author of “The Declaration of Independence”, the most important of all our founding documents.
Yet few of them have even heard of another document that I would say might be the second most important declaration he ever wrote: The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798. He drafted them secretly while he was serving as vice president. It was written in response to the hated Alien and Sedition Acts which were passed under the Adams administration during an undeclared war with France.
The acts authorized the president to deport any resident alien considered dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States, to apprehend and deport resident aliens if their home countries were at war with the United States, and criminalized any speech which might defame Congress, the President, or bring either of them into contempt or disrepute. You could compare it to the Patriot Act, but really it was much worse. Either way, The Alien and Sedition Acts were probably Thomas Jefferson’s worst nightmare.
Some people are surprised to learn that in response to these acts, Jefferson did not hold up the First Amendment in protest. Rather he invoked the Tenth Amendment, which states that:
Essentially, he argued that by passing and enforcing the Alien and Sedition Acts, the federal government had over stepped its bounds and was exercising powers which belonged to the states.
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
In other words, the Alien and Sedition Acts were acts of usurpation.
James Madison corresponded with Jefferson about these issues, (they suspected that their mail was being secretly opened and read by the way). As a result of their correspondence, James Madison penned another series of resolutions against the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were passed by the Virginia legislature in 1798 and 1799.
As important as these resolutions were in objecting to the unconstitutional Alien and Sedition Acts, their lasting importance was due to the the fact that they were strong statements in defense of federalism, the sovereignty of the people of the several states, and the authority of state governments to check or resist the tyrannical proclivities of the federal government.
Read more: http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010...r-declaration/
Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 10-20-2012 at 10:43 AM.
State by State, a Nullification Domino Effect
Marijuana oil has amazing medicinal properties. We should rejoice in decriminalization, because war on drugs is:
a) immoral
b) impractical
c) devastating to liberty and thus the life of the nation.
Let FREEDOM ring!
http://lewrockwell.com/orig12/poindexter9.1.1.html
Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 11-21-2012 at 07:50 PM.
The Michigan House of Representatives unanimously passed the NDAA nullification bill to prevent indefinite detention of American citizens by the federal government. [The bill now is headed for the state Senate.] TAC 2012 Dec 5 (Cached)
http://www.realityzone.com/currentperiod.html
Tom Woods:
Ron Paul Right, Thought Controllers Wrong, on Secession
Right on! Brilliant.
Any one who doesn't vote for it is a complete traitor IMO. Hopefully more and more state houses will start telling the fedcoats to go back over the pond from whence they came.
Right on!
They will only do so when the people demand it. In no uncertain terms.
Great thread Foundation_Of_Liberty.
"The Patriarch"
Thanks!
Montana Lawmaker Moves to Protect Second Amendment
A Montana lawmaker is proposing amendments to the Constitution to nullify the effects of laws in the works to outlaw firearms.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/montana-...amendment.html
Last edited by Foundation_Of_Liberty; 01-04-2013 at 07:43 PM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Connect With Us