TexasCHLforum.com

This should be interesting if it gets any traction. I have seen other states in other years move in this direction, but I do not know if any of them had any success.

HCR 50 - Texas: Affirming that the State of Texas claims sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal government by the U.S. Constitution, serving notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates, and providing that certain federal legislation be prohibited or repealed.

.PDF Warning

http://www.statesurge.com/bills/482127-hcr-50-texas" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ND

its never going to happen........... the government is to corrupt now for any positive change to happen.

This is a much better way to attack the anti-gun problem. Really, we need to get off of the 2nd Amendment, which only tangentially addresses the self-defense application of gun ownership and carry rights, in favor of the 9th Amendment and 10th Amendment arguments.

9th Amendment argument: we have an inalienable right to self defense, and to possess the effective means to exercise this right.

10th Amendment argument: the application of any restriction on the possession or carrying of arms must be left to the States, and if not explicitly by the states, then the people (as individuals) are free to make up their own mind.

That would be nice but I'm not holding my breath.

Here's the Bill on the State's Site: http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLook ... Bill=HCR50" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've read HCR 50 and it, of course, sounds good but I am just a lowly science teacher and legal mumbo jumbo takes me a while to work out.

IF, on the off chance, it should pass what could/would it really mean or do?

troglodyte wrote:I've read HCR 50 and it, of course, sounds good but I am just a lowly science teacher and legal mumbo jumbo takes me a while to work out.

IF, on the off chance, it should pass what could/would it really mean or do?

Nothing, the Texas legislature doesn't have the gall to stand behind it.

It is a resolution, not a Bill. Unfortunately.

troglodyte wrote:I've read HCR 50 and it, of course, sounds good but I am just a lowly science teacher and legal mumbo jumbo takes me a while to work out.

IF, on the off chance, it should pass what could/would it really mean or do?

If enemy combattants are violating the constitution it would be legal to shoot them.

I am very pleased to see Texas joining a large and growing number of states who are creating and passing similar resolutions in their own states. This is a very good thing inasmuch as it puts the feds on notice that their violations of the highest law in the land are being noticed and won't be tolerated for much longer.

Should give the new AG (Eric Holder) a bit of work to do............

Maybe it will at least keep him busy enough to stay outta our hair!

AEA wrote:Should give the new AG (Eric Holder) a bit of work to do............

Maybe it will at least keep him busy enough to stay outta our hair!

Unfortunately I have to disagree. A resolution is only that, a resolution. I resolve to get skinny and not annoy women, and it all amounts to naught.

Understood!