[118857] in Cypherpunks
Re: Inferno: The Constitution & Gun Rights: It's bigger than
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Reese)
Sat Oct 9 05:04:49 1999
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991008225111.00aef990@flex.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 1999 22:51:11 -1000
To: Jim Choate <ravage@einstein.ssz.com>, cypherpunks@einstein.ssz.com
From: Reese <reeza@flex.com>
In-Reply-To: <199910090337.WAA07907@einstein.ssz.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Reply-To: Reese <reeza@flex.com>
Jim, did you originate this, or fwd it?
Either way, I have questions,,,
At 10:37 PM 10/8/99 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
>----- Forwarded message from Jim Choate -----
>
>X-URL: http://www.ssz.com/cdr/guns.html
>
////
> It is worth making special note that the Presidential claim to
> executive privilige regarding the use of military forces without
> Congressional permission is unconstitutional (see Article II). The
> Constitution clearly states the President is the commander in chief of
> the armed forces only after they have been called into action. And
> only Congress may call them into action. The President of the United
> States is not in the chain of command of the military forces without
> specific authorization from Congress. Until such time as that is given
> only Congress has the authority to direct and organize military
> activities.
Is this addressed in an EO? EO's are constitutional, so said the supremes,
I accept this so long as they only apply to the executive branch (and no
one else, directly or by extension), so the question therefore includes a
reparse to: Are the armed forces part of the executive branch, either
before or after activation by congress? By what exingency does the CIC
claim to maintain purpetual status as acting CIC?
> Amendment 2, 4, & 9 provide in and of themselves sufficient grounds to
> find any federal involvement in the purchase, possession, or operation
> of a weapon to be unconstitutional.
Stop preaching to the choir, you're putting them to sleep,,, ;b
> THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES
>
////
> Article I
////
> Section 8.
////
> To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use
> shall be for a longer term than two years;
What was used as precedent to maintain a standing army for greater than 2
years? Does it somehow involve the civil war as I've heard suggested
elsewhere, or not?
Reese
