QuarterBoreGunner,
I also am a second-class citizen of the land of the less-free. One interesting comparison to look out for is the fed enforcement of fed law, over-riding state law enacted from the passage of Prop 215, the medical marijuana law. It seems that right now they are sort of not doing much to stop it, but in the past they have. And there is always the genuine threat and feeling that they will, at any time flex their muscle and over-ride state law. My point is that if they are going to act to take away state-voted rights away from people who voted for them in a supposedly democratic system, then why shouldn't it be demanded that the fed laws over-ride state laws when the states have made laws in an undemocratic way to take away individual rights? I already know the answer, but it is still an interesting comparison in that it shows that individual rights are not protected in this country by the feds... Laws made undemocratically (sp), or at least less-democratically in such states as California, which take away individual rights and freedoms are allowed by the federal government to be vigorously enforced and prosecuted by the states and localities. Meanwhile, laws which are made democratically which approve more individual rights for the people of a state can be over-ridden by federal laws and prosecuted by the feds. So when you do the math, the federal law only works to take away individual rights and not to protect them. A little confusing, but I tried. Wonderful system though, don't you think?
seed.
