Whatever isn’t in the Constitution is left for the People and their States

[billy]

i have every right to say i'm leaving the discussion.
oooh thats right someone controls me lmao.

i also have every right not only to assume but say

"when you show me otherwise we can carry on this discussion" (between you and me) because if you can't show me otherwise you won't be talking to me and as far as i'm concered we (me and you) won't carry on this discussion. no aner or vitriolic tantrum. just a fact

when you can show me i don't have that right, we'll talk about some more.
i have reported you for attacking me in post. (telling me i'm getting pissed off) please stick to the topic and leave what you think of me out of it please.

[Benny2guns]

i have every right to say i'm leaving the discussion.
oooh thats right someone controls me lmao.

i also have every right not only to assume but say

"when you show me otherwise we can carry on this discussion" (between you and me) because if you can't show me otherwise you won't be talking to me and as far as i'm concered we (me and you) won't carry on this discussion. no aner or vitriolic tantrum. just a fact

when you can show me i don't have that right, we'll talk about some more.
i have reported you for attacking me in post. (telling me i'm getting pissed off) please stick to the topic and leave what you think of me out of it please.

I said seems that way.
It really does not matter Bill I have already stated in previous posts my views on the tenth and I can only say the same thing so many times.
I see the tenth as the last amendment to the constitution, the original constitution as I see it and I believe it was intended to keep the power with the state and the people and away from the fed. Thats it and I have said that before.

[srijantje]

no personal attacks here please,do that in the sewer/mod

[billy]

There is nothing in the U.S. constitution that allows the U.S. government to implement substance prohibitions. When alcohol was banned after WWI, it required an amendment to the constitution to implement the ban. But the U.S. government has nevertheless since that time barged ahead with prohibitions against numerous other substances, such as cannabis, cocaine and opiates without any constitutional blessing, by simply using the commerce clause.

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:
[The Congress shall have power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian tribes;

Provided the U.S. Supreme Court will allow for a broad interpretation of the commerce clause, the U.S. congress and government can use it as an umbrella clause, and do any damn thing they want to in the 50 states.

i think thats what i said when i posted this;

only the meaning of them has to be changed (the interpretation) and guess what, thats right it's the supreme court that tells the american people how to interpret them) it's why sawn off shot guns that were'nt banned, now are.

plus the fact the gov can always put in to amend or add any bill they wish and should it be ratified by a certain proportion of states it will become a binding amendment, as indeed it did with alcohol twice.
once to ban it, and once to repeal the ban. as it did with equal rights re voting etc. as it did re slavery.