Publius Huldah shows federal gun control is unlawful

March 3, 2013 - Posted by Publius Huldah | 2nd Amendment, armed citizens, gun control, marque and reprisal, Militia, Resistance to tyranny, Tennessee Constitution | Militia, resistence to tyranny, Tennessee Constitution

55 Comments »

beats me! Except that I have come to see that people aren’t very smart.

LikeLike

Comment by Publius Huldah | March 27, 2020 | Reply
Ma’am,

I submit to you that the background checks are unconstitutional. Why? Because they amount to asking for permission to buy a gun. When you walk in to a gun shop, they place a call; on the other end of the line is a gov’t bureaucrat who says ‘yes’ or ‘no’, you may or may not buy that gun. Well, if you have to ask permission to do something, then it’s axiomatic that you do not have the RIGHT to do that something! Because of that, the Second Amendment has already been de facto repealed.

I called Mark Levin last night and told him this. He deflected my point; he failed to address it at all. First, he asked if I had a gun. I told him no, and he then proceeded to tell me about the five guns he owns, along with a thousand rounds of ammunition. He then asked if I aware of the fact that the federal constitution didn’t apply to the states; I told I was. He then said he’d talk to the audience, and, for me, the call was over. He proceeded to talk about the corporation doctrine before going to another call. Never once did he address my points-not once!

It occurred to me afterward that I could have pointed out that the various state constitutions also enshrine the right to bear arms. I don’t know that it would have done a lot of good though.

Because of this, I think Mark Levin is DANGEROUS. He’s a lot more dangerous than the statists/liberals who come out and say that they want to take our rights away. He’s a closet statist and a traitor. He’s pushing the COS nonsense, and that can only end badly. Thank you.

MarkyMark

LikeLike

Comment by MarkyMark | May 26, 2018 | Reply
Exactly! This confirms what I’ve been posting for years. No government has any lawful JURISDICTION on the subject matter of the bearing and keeping of arms by individuals except in the case of commission of crimes therewith – especially in the U.S. And, by the way, may I take this opportunity to say GOODBYE to almost FORMER President Obamao.

LikeLike

Comment by Diamondback | January 19, 2017 | Reply
[…] As shown here, all federal laws and rules of the BATF pertaining to background checks, dealer licensing, banning […]

LikeLike

Pingback by Publius Huldah: Parental Rights - God-given and Unalienable? Or Government-granted and Revocable? | USA NEWS FIRST | July 30, 2013 | Reply
[…] As shown here, all federal laws and rules of the BATF pertaining to background checks, dealer licensing, banning […]

LikeLike

Pingback by Parental Rights: God-given and Unalienable? Or Government-granted and Revocable? « Publius-Huldah's Blog | July 28, 2013 | Reply
[…] Reference […]

LikeLike

Pingback by Publius Huldah shows federal gun control is unlawful « Daily Truth Pills | May 4, 2013 | Reply
- The speaker was not introduced. Who is she? Does she represent a particular organization? Is there contact info in case others would like to host an event with this lady as a featured speaker?
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Hyatt | May 26, 2013 | Reply
  - Hyatt, I am Publius Huldah – the speaker in the video you referenced.
    
    I represent our Founding Fathers, our Framers, those who died in our War for Independence, and all today who want to restore our Constitution and Founding Principles.
    
    I do not represent any particular organization.
    
    One may contact me here. My email is posted on the “contact” page.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Comment by Publius Huldah | May 26, 2013 | Reply
Absolutely amazing & eloquent defense of our Constitution. Thank you so very much & may God bless you & yours greatly. I’m sharing this with everyone!

LikeLike

Comment by btruth | May 3, 2013 | Reply
- Thank you! Your encouragement helps me so much.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Publius Huldah | May 4, 2013 | Reply
[…] ‘law’ that infringes on our rights, as law abiding citizens, to keep and bear arms is UNCONSTITUTIONAL! All the background checks in the world won’t prevent a criminal, intent to do harm, from […]

LikeLike

Pingback by “…SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.” , An Ol' Broad's Ramblings | April 17, 2013 | Reply
Ms. Huldah, ma’am, words cannot express how much your profound commitment to, and defense of, our Constitution means to me and so many others. You have my eternal gratitude.

LikeLike

Comment by Laura Bernard Mielcarek | March 19, 2013 | Reply
- Thank you so much, dear!
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Publius Huldah | March 19, 2013 | Reply
- PH is THE one to follow. Like a little baby cheetah that has lost it’s momma because these last many years we have been blinded and dumbed down by the political clowns smearing their makeup in our eyes and ears causing us to stray and lose the scent of GOD given, Our Mother, Lady Liberty.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Noah | March 19, 2013 | Reply
  - But remember, dear, I am just a person.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Comment by Publius Huldah | March 19, 2013 | Reply
    - Our Tree of Constitutional Liberty needs nurturing. You are doing that, I say. I pray You continue. We’ve got your back for that. In your real world experience you have special insightfulness the rest of us lack. Lead, give a call. We will follow. GOD SPEED.
      
      LikeLike
      
      Comment by Noah | March 20, 2013 | Reply
Nice speech! What was the context? It never really showed the audience so I couldn’t tell if you were talking to anyone important (haha).

I came here to ask two questions:

1) What is your opinion on the sixth amendment right recognizing assistance of counsel?

2) How do you feel about Shelby County v Holder? While I disagree with section 5 and the entire VRA in principle, it seems like Congress does have the authority to pass this law, consistent with it being a “necessary and proper” exercise of their enumerated power to enforce the 14th and 15th amendments.

Just curious.

LikeLike

Comment by Ross | March 13, 2013 | Reply
- Thank you, Ross!
  I was speaking to a group of citizens, 4 County Sheriffs, and a State legislator. All of them are important!
  
  1. I have no opinions on the 6th Amdt. I always say our precious opinions are worthless, we must go by what the Framers said!
  
  That said, I have never researched the 6th Amdt to find out why they thought it important to put in that the accused has the right to the Assistance of Counsel. Did the English criminal courts sometimes deny that right to defendants? Did they contemplate that defense lawyers would do it for free (pro bono); or that taxpayers would be forced to pay the defense lawyers? I don’t know since I never looked into this.
  
  The 1st 10 amendments applied only to restrict the powers of the federal government. NOT THE STATES who had their own Constitutions. For a correct statement of this original understanding that the bill of rights applied only to the federal government see Barron v. Baltimore (1833):
  
  The FACTS of the case are here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0032_0243_ZS.html
  The OPINION is here: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0032_0243_ZO.html
  
  Of course, the supreme Court has since changed sides and has for a long time claimed that it has power to impose their views of the 1st 10 amendments on the States, as well as the federal government.
  
  One comment about pro bono work: Traditionally, defense lawyers saw it as their professional duty to take the occasional pro bono case. As a former criminal defense lawyer, I agree that we have the duty to take the occasional pro bono criminal defense case.
  
  Also, remember that if Congress only made criminal laws about matters they had constitutional authority to make laws about, the federal criminal bar would have VERY LITTLE TO DO! https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2009/06/29/us-criminal-code/
  
  2. I haven’t read Shelby County v. Holder. Save me some time, and give me the gist of it and the particular issues in which you are interested.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Publius Huldah | March 15, 2013 | Reply
  - You surprise me again! I had anticipated you disliking the 6th amendment right to counsel given that it cuts against the Randian moral formula– *someone* has to be forced to provide that defense, and their fundamental rights are trampled. I guess if the Framers were saying that no one will be *forbidden* from having council, rather than that taxpayers must provide council, it would make more sense.
    
    Shelby County v Holder is the case in which Shelby County, Alabama is challenging section 5 of the voting rights act, which requires them and other covered jurisdictions to get preclearance any time that they wish to change *anything* regarding their voting laws. They claim that Congress used a very old formula (1970s) to determine which areas are covered and that it damages the Federalist nature of our country to break jurisdictions into “covered” and “uncovered.” I’ve been reading the briefs and arguments and was hoping for your opinion, if you have one.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Comment by Ross | March 16, 2013 | Reply
    - 1. Doctors sometimes treat people for free, at least they used to. Typically, lawyers are/were among the more privileged members of society; so defending the occasional defendant for free is something I, and many other lawyers, were most willing, from time to time, to do. Our love for Justice is supposed to be greater than our love for money.
      
      That said, no one should be forced to do pro bono work! But many lawyers would rather defend someone for free than see him unjustly treated in court.
      
      2. Of course, there is a distinctly Right and Wrong side on the voting laws conflict. Except as specifically delegated to the federal government by the 4 voting rights Amendments (freed slaves, women, people who don’t pay the tax, and people between 18-21), THE STATES RETAINED TOTAL POWER TO DETERMINE THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THOSE WHOSE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO VOTE. https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2010/12/05/arizonas-proposition-200-what-the-constitution-really-says-about-voter-qualifications-exposing-the-elections-clause-argument/
      
      LikeLike
      
      Comment by Publius Huldah | March 16, 2013 | Reply
    - YOU GUYS love freedom,TRY READING THE “DICK ACT OF 1902” it forbbids,any and all gun laws forever,it can’t be changed and can’t be repealed,AND ITS “TREASON” to VIOLATE IT,all these criiminals in DC and every state know it………………….
      
      LikeLike
      
      Comment by ARIZONA | May 4, 2013 | Reply
      - Oh, Arizona, it is so harmful when people who don’t know speak as if they are experts. You are quite wrong. See this: https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/01/19/gun-control-the-dick-act-of-1902-bills-of-attainder-ex-post-facto-laws/
        
        OK! I had high school physics. Over 50 years ago. Now I am going to post a comment somewhere where I pontificate about the safety of nuclear power plants. B/c I know all about it. See?
        
        LikeLike
        
        Comment by Publius Huldah | May 4, 2013
Well, According To President Barack Hussein Obama, The Constitution & The Bill Of Rights, Aren’t Worth The Paper They were Written On.

LikeLike

Comment by John Serafin | March 10, 2013 | Reply
- Yes, Hard times are ahead for us. It isn’t going to be pretty.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Publius Huldah | March 10, 2013 | Reply
  - Let’s pray GOD not. Let’s ALL encourage all we can to stand, show-up to push back this evil before us.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Comment by Noah | March 10, 2013 | Reply
[…] Publius Huldah explains why federal gun control laws are unconstitutional -https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/publius-huldah-shows-federal-gun-control-is-unlawful/ […]

LikeLike

Pingback by The Constitutionality of Federal Gun Control Laws by Diane Rufino Attorney at Law | Randy's Right III | March 8, 2013 | Reply
[…] Publius Huldah explains why federal gun control laws are unconstitutional -https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/publius-huldah-shows-federal-gun-control-is-unlawful/ […]

LikeLike

Pingback by The Constitutionality of Federal Gun Control Laws | Why the TEA Party? | March 8, 2013 | Reply
[…] Publius Huldah explains why federal gun control laws are unconstitutional -https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/publius-huldah-shows-federal-gun-control-is-unlawful/ […]

LikeLike

Pingback by The Constitutionality of Gun Control Laws | Tea In Politics | March 8, 2013 | Reply
[…] Publius Huldah explains why federal gun control laws are unconstitutional -https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/publius-huldah-shows-federal-gun-control-is-unlawful/ […]

LikeLike

Pingback by The Constitutionality of Federal Gun Control Laws | My Blog | March 8, 2013 | Reply
[…] Publius Huldah explains why federal gun control laws are unconstitutional -https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/publius-huldah-shows-federal-gun-control-is-unlawful/ […]

LikeLike

Pingback by The Constitutionality of Federal Gun Control Laws – North Carolina Tenth Amendment Center | March 8, 2013 | Reply
[…] Publius Huldah explains why federal gun control laws are unconstitutional -https://publiushuldah.wordpress.com/2013/03/03/publius-huldah-shows-federal-gun-control-is-unlawful/ […]

LikeLike

Pingback by The Constitutionality of Federal Gun Control Laws | Forloveofgodandcountry's Blog | March 8, 2013 | Reply
COMPILATION OF PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT (OBAMACARE)
[As Amended Through May 1, 2010] INCLUDING
PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT HEALTH-RELATED PORTIONS OF THE HEALTH CARE AND EDUCATION RECONCILIATION ACT OF 2010 PREPARED BY THE
Office of the Legislative Counsel FOR THE USE OF THE
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Sec. 1001\2717 PHSA PPACA (Consolidated) page 20

PROTECTION OF SECOND AMENDMENT GUN RIGHTS —
As WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS —
For purposes of added by section 10101(e)(2)

‘‘(1) WELLNESS AND PREVENTION PROGRAMS — A wellness and health promotion activity implemented under subsection (a)(1)(D) may not require the disclosure or collection of any information relating to—
‘‘(A) The presence or storage of a lawfully-possessed firearm or ammunition in the residence or on the property of an individual; or
‘‘(B) The lawful use, possession, or storage of a firearm or ammunition by an individual

‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON DATA COLLECTION None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used for the collection of any information relating to—
‘‘(A) The lawful ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition;
‘‘(B) The lawful use of a firearm or ammunition; or
‘‘(C) The lawful storage of a firearm or ammunition ‘‘

(3) LIMITATION ON DATABASES OR DATA BANKS — None of the authorities provided to the Secretary under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or an amendment made by that Act shall be construed to authorize or may be used to maintain records of individual ownership or possession of a firearm or ammunition.

MEDICAL PERSONNEL VIOLATE THIS FEDERAL LAW DAILY!

DO NOT TREAD ON US!

LikeLike

Comment by Rav James Talbott | March 7, 2013 | Reply
The second amendment doesn’t give us the right to bear arms. We have that right, innately, as human beings. Whether you believe it is from God, or from nature; or Logic, order, and reason. EVERY person has the inalienable right to possess and bear any and all armaments necessary to provide for survival and liberty. What the second amendment does is tell the federal government not to infringe upon that inalienable, god-given, HUMAN right. It doesn’t give us anything, it takes AWAY, from the government, the ability to tread upon it.

LikeLike

Comment by Hal Gailey | March 7, 2013 | Reply
- AMEN, Hal! We must drive this Principle into the heads of our Countrymen. They have been indoctrinated with the LIE that our “rights” come from the Constitution – the “bill of rights”. But the “bill of rights” is entirely under the control of the federal judges!
  
  That is why I get so frustrated with the gullible and unthinking people who clamor for the parental rights amendment. They are so gullible that they believe that it is giving “constitutional protection” to their rights as parents. But what it actually does is turn children over to the tender mercies of the federal government. And our People have been so dumbded down by almost 200 years of progressive education that they can’t think.
  
  Alexander Hamilton warned in Federalist No. 84, around the 10th para, that a bill of rights – in a Constitution which delegates only narrowly defined and enumerated powers to the government – is DANGEROUS, as well as unnecessary. For it provides a pretext to regulate, for those inclined to usurp. He was so right!
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Publius Huldah | March 7, 2013 | Reply
- Mr Gailey understands PH.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Noah | March 7, 2013 | Reply
In addition to Mike’s link below to P.H.’s testimony to the TN Senate Judiciary Committee, the full hearing is available here: http://youtu.be/Vbcm5Uy0iTc FYI. Publius’ Q&A session with the Senators runs from 37:30 to 1:03:00, and directly follows her 6 minute statement.

I found the whole thing intriguing, and think you all might as well. Aside from the wonderful substance of it, particularly enjoyable was when P.H. responded to a repeated push for her “opinion” by saying, “All I do is say what our framers said. This is not ever a matter of personal opinion. What did our framers say?” This is the root of it all, and it is all that we agreed to.

It was encouraging, to me at least, the sense left by some Senators that constitutional limits on federal authority and state sovereignty matters.

P.H., what was that Civil War line about? And Mr. Kelsey was downright rude to not let you finish your thoughts on the 1832 nullification controversy, and the distinction between dealing with bad constitutional law and dealing with unconstitutional law.

LikeLike

Comment by subconch | March 7, 2013 | Reply
- Thank you, subconch!
  
  “They” say that since the South lost the war for Southern Secession, no State can ever nullify anything the federal government ever does for the rest of time.
  
  Yes, Kelsey is a bully. Next time, I will lecture any such young man who treats me with such disrespect. I will inform him that I am a Lady, old enough to be his mother, and that he should treat old ladies with courtesy and respect. Old gentlemen also.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Publius Huldah | March 7, 2013 | Reply
  - Hear, Hear.
    
    LikeLike
    
    Comment by Noah | March 7, 2013 | Reply
[…] is sorely lacking in our government “representatives”. I hope you will watch and share: Publius Huldah Shows Federal Gun Control is Unlawful (on her blog: “Understanding the […]

LikeLike

Pingback by Video: “Publius Huldah Shows Federal Gun Control is Unlawful” | SubConch | March 5, 2013 | Reply
Reblogged this on GOD, GUTS,OLD GLORYand AMMO and commented:
THIS SAYS IT ALL , GOVERNMENT IS UNLAWFUL NEEDS TO BE REPLACED

LikeLike

Comment by GOD GUTS GLORY and AMMO | March 4, 2013 | Reply
Dear Friend! I cannot listen to this enough! Was glad to spot in comments the link to your testimony before the legislature. A race to get all information out to them, wasn’t it?! God love you, PH. I do! (one of many)

Carol

LikeLike

Comment by Carol Boggs | March 4, 2013 | Reply
- Thank you, my dear dear Carol!
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Publius Huldah | March 5, 2013 | Reply
Hi Ph, I thought you might find this interesting… “Obama DHS Purchases 2,700 Light-Armored Tanks to Go With Their 1.6 Billion Bullet Stockpile”

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/obama-dhs-purchases-2700-light-armored-tanks-to-go-with-their-1-6-billion-bullet-stockpile/

The Obamination is building up his National Security Force.

LikeLike

Comment by Spense | March 4, 2013 | Reply
Well done PH!

LikeLike

Comment by Spense | March 4, 2013 | Reply
- Hear, Hear.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Noah | March 4, 2013 | Reply
PH, this is magnificent in detail! While arms is the focus, you have done more to bring to the discussion the profound wisdom and perspicacity of our founders than many other topics have! No doubt the imminent danger we are in has something to do with it. And to see and hear the place of our sheriff’s and what they are doing must surely inspire potential “manly men” and “womanly women”!!

Please do help or encourage Jewelant to get your speeches on clear tapes!

Carol

LikeLike

Comment by Carol Boggs | March 4, 2013 | Reply
- The Patriots are riled up including many of Our Constitutional Sheriffs. Our Sheriffs are The True Red/White-N-Blue Constitutional Liberty Law Officers in our areas. They are The Interposition check on tyranny of all sorts.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Noah | March 4, 2013 | Reply
  - “AND” I say that as reference “needed” concerning Our Sheriffs. In fact as PH will tell anyone “EACH” Individual Citizen of Spine AND Armed is Interposition Authority in The Body Patriot of “WE THE PEOPLE” “STAND, STEP FORWARD, COME OUT” for Our Constitution-One Nation Under GOD and TO The Republic for which It Stands. Our Rights are from GOD, “ONLY” “Hallelujah”
    
    LikeLike
    
    Comment by Noah | March 4, 2013 | Reply
This is phenomenal. Thanks.

LikeLike

Comment by Art Wilson | March 4, 2013 | Reply
I put this on the tv for the whole family to watch tonite, along with the videos from your YouTube page. I have been trying to copy and fix the ones from the State of TN website, but its been difficult. If I can get them done would you be interested in putting them on your blog page? I sent a message to the State of TN website asking where the download page for the videos was, but have gotten no answer. I feel as if our tax money paid for the darned equipment to film it, so we deserve to be able to get a digital copy of any of the videotaped legislation.

LikeLike

Comment by jewelant | March 3, 2013 | Reply
- It’s been done Jewlelant you can watch Mike Maharrey’s presentation here and I uploaded PH’s presentation myself, just her part is here without the Q&A as You Tube only allows 15 minutes.
  
  LikeLike
  
  Comment by Mike | March 4, 2013 | Reply
  - Thank you so much, Mike!
    
    LikeLike
    
    Comment by Publius Huldah | March 4, 2013 | Reply
Natural and excellent!

LikeLike

Comment by John Drew | March 3, 2013 | Reply
The best Constitutional Research I have ever witnessed. All Patriotic effort will share this.

LikeLike

Comment by Noah | March 3, 2013 | Reply
John 8:32 Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free

We are experiencing desperate times. The confusion and moral breakdown of our society is leading us further and faster down the Road to Serfdom than anyone imagined possible. It is in this state of confusion and moral breakdown that petty dictators gain the power to manipulate and mislead as we see now in the everyday headlines.

What created this state of confusion are the decades of frontal attacks on our Judeo-Christian heritage by those on the Left. The enemy of the two-bit tyrant is the clear thinking that our religious heritage provided to us generation after generation. In the environment of moral equivalency on every subject and manner, citizens lack the ability to measure and judge both their own values and those of their leaders.

To quote John Adams, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” We are now getting the bitter taste of just how inadequate our Constitution has become in the face of this moral and religious decay and it is this that conservatives must address in order to restore our country to the greatness that our destiny demands.

LikeLike

Comment by Larry Lotter | March 3, 2013 | Reply