Who made that rule? The constitution says nothing about “the state legislature may declare their own electors... if they get the governor’s consent”. The governor isn’t even mentioned, right?
The US Constitution also says nothing about needing a government agency's permission to have a quiet gun or one that shoots fast... or one with a short barrel but a different shaped stock....... but here we are. Bullshit creeps in over time, and becomes accepted and "legally" enforced.
Note that I'm not sure if that applies here or not, (mainly just bitching about the ATF infringement.)
My reading of the constitution is similar to yours. I think they intended us to buy anything the government can buy. Including tanks, nukes, artillery, anything we’d need to form a militia capable of overthrowing a tyrannical government.
I'm guessing that had the Founders envisioned a device like a nuclear weapon, they would have explicitly excluded that from the definition of "arms". It's possible they would have banned the government from having them too. It would be horrifying to them.
Maybe. But if that’s the case, horrifying weapons of war already existed back then and were not excluded.
I’m not loving the thought of millions of hicks like me with nukes, of course. But a “well regulated militia”? Why not? If that’s what it takes to overthrow a tyrannical government, so be it.
"Arms" are actually well defined in their era. Something one man can carry and operate. Designed to hit one target, usually human rather than materiel. Differentiated from artillery. And yet, certain Congressmen had cannons on their porch, and fired them in anger. Ship owners had cannons, which they needed against pirates and proved quite useful as a mercenary US navy.
I'd be cool with sticking with this definition. It brings up the question of TOW / RPG and such; drawing the line of some of that rather than select fire should be the furthest we even consider comprising on without stacking bodies.
Exactly. The legislators could get on a conference call, write a statement, put each of their names on it, and post it on Twitter saying they vote to send their own Trump electors.
There's usually a way around procedural parliamentary bullshit. For something of this importance, you don't tuck your tail between your legs and say "but, but the meany Governor won't let me exercise my powers!".
This is typical RINO, weak fence sitting bullshit.
Doing this would create a very unusual scenario where on 1/6 VP Pence would have two different envelopes to open from PA. One with the Governor's seal, one without. There is no clear law directing him what to do. He could decide, and Pelosi could in turn call the sargeant at arms to have the Senate removed from House chambers. This would stop the meeting, leaving no candidate declared for inauguration day. This has never happened in US history afaik, and would show that the system is broken. It is. Rubicon Don could legally assume emergency power, indefinitely. As CiC if the military obeyed him, we're good. Millions of us should clog the streets of DC in this case. If he also raises the Insurrection Act, the unorganized militia is automatically activated. Then we are the Kraken! And we outnumber the military some 100:1. But we do need to show up.
Electors clause of the Constitution. Each state legislature appoints electors. Because laws, chain of custody, and no sense can now be made of PA election results, the state legislature votes count.
Who made that rule? The constitution says nothing about “the state legislature may declare their own electors... if they get the governor’s consent”. The governor isn’t even mentioned, right?
The US Constitution also says nothing about needing a government agency's permission to have a quiet gun or one that shoots fast... or one with a short barrel but a different shaped stock....... but here we are. Bullshit creeps in over time, and becomes accepted and "legally" enforced.
Note that I'm not sure if that applies here or not, (mainly just bitching about the ATF infringement.)
My reading of the constitution is similar to yours. I think they intended us to buy anything the government can buy. Including tanks, nukes, artillery, anything we’d need to form a militia capable of overthrowing a tyrannical government.
I'm guessing that had the Founders envisioned a device like a nuclear weapon, they would have explicitly excluded that from the definition of "arms". It's possible they would have banned the government from having them too. It would be horrifying to them.
Maybe. But if that’s the case, horrifying weapons of war already existed back then and were not excluded.
I’m not loving the thought of millions of hicks like me with nukes, of course. But a “well regulated militia”? Why not? If that’s what it takes to overthrow a tyrannical government, so be it.
"Arms" are actually well defined in their era. Something one man can carry and operate. Designed to hit one target, usually human rather than materiel. Differentiated from artillery. And yet, certain Congressmen had cannons on their porch, and fired them in anger. Ship owners had cannons, which they needed against pirates and proved quite useful as a mercenary US navy.
I'd be cool with sticking with this definition. It brings up the question of TOW / RPG and such; drawing the line of some of that rather than select fire should be the furthest we even consider comprising on without stacking bodies.
100% agree.
Exactly. The legislators could get on a conference call, write a statement, put each of their names on it, and post it on Twitter saying they vote to send their own Trump electors.
There's usually a way around procedural parliamentary bullshit. For something of this importance, you don't tuck your tail between your legs and say "but, but the meany Governor won't let me exercise my powers!".
This is typical RINO, weak fence sitting bullshit.
I have 0 respect for this Cutler cuck.
IANAL but that is exactly what I’ve been thinking about these state rep cucks!
Doing this would create a very unusual scenario where on 1/6 VP Pence would have two different envelopes to open from PA. One with the Governor's seal, one without. There is no clear law directing him what to do. He could decide, and Pelosi could in turn call the sargeant at arms to have the Senate removed from House chambers. This would stop the meeting, leaving no candidate declared for inauguration day. This has never happened in US history afaik, and would show that the system is broken. It is. Rubicon Don could legally assume emergency power, indefinitely. As CiC if the military obeyed him, we're good. Millions of us should clog the streets of DC in this case. If he also raises the Insurrection Act, the unorganized militia is automatically activated. Then we are the Kraken! And we outnumber the military some 100:1. But we do need to show up.
Electors clause of the Constitution. Each state legislature appoints electors. Because laws, chain of custody, and no sense can now be made of PA election results, the state legislature votes count.
You didn't read what you replied to.