View Full Version : College Response to the GRAY area of the Constitution

Infantry H2
10-21-2013, 4:25 PM
Article IV Full Faith and Credit

Article IV.

Section 1. Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State th the public Acts, Records and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

Section 2. The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Priviledges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. ...

(Source: The U.S. Constitution (link in Unit 1)

The haziness of Article IV in the U.S. Constitution is apparent when we look at law practices today. Having a passion for personally owned firearms myself, I generally would preach on the Second Ammendment but this research has brought up new meaning.

Section 1 and the way it is written with 'shall' instead of 'will' doesn't clearly dignify with authority the intent of the phrase or section. It's missing that command presence which I believes leaves too much room for interpretation. I believe it lets the information that is supposed to be passed from State to State fall between the cracks and creates a LESS perfect Union due to lack of or optional communication.

Section 2 along with the 'shall' issue, says we are entitled to all priviledges and Immunities in the several states. Moving back to my point as a gun owner, while I was living in California I got into purchasing many types of firearms. I had a concealed carry permit in Colorado which is good in a few states, but not in California. In California, you can get a concealed carry permit if you live in certain counties; Sacramento, the state capitol being one of the city/counties. However, about 100 miles south in Santa Clara County, I could not obtain one. The difference, 'shall' and 'will' issue counties based on the same background checks identified by the California Department of Justice. If I am being told another citizen can do one thing in my state, should I be entitled the same right being from the same state? Am I being prejudiced by the County I reside? According to Section IV, and the intent of the Constitution I shall be entitiled to the Privilidges and Immunities as my fellow Citizens.

The gray area I am bringing up is that todays law misconstrues the meaning of what was intended. A lot of people think 'shall' is another meaning for 'may' when in the times that the U.S. Constitution was written the terms would have been 'shall' or 'shall not.'

CALGUNs: I am studying business law and this was my response. Just looking for input from some of the professionals in here.

10-21-2013, 4:30 PM
i think there was a case defining that that allows areas to ignore the acts which it finds are shocking to community standards

Infantry H2
10-21-2013, 4:58 PM
We the People of the United States, in Order to for a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

These are the words of the United States, not the county of...a police officer is given his authority from Police Chief, who gets his from the Mayor, who was voted for By the People. They are trusted by the Governments established law by good faith and credit to delegate the laws of the Constitution. Article IV with the 2A walk hand in hand. Why is it we can move to Florida and get a Tax Stamp for an SBR but not in California? Are we not the same person? There are an abundance of car accidents on the 101, does that mean we shut it down due to shocking community standards? Crime goes up in areas with VERY strict gun laws and criminals state that they go there to commit crimes because its 'easier.' There is no proven fact that preventing a law abiding citizen from obtaining a concealed carry permit causes crime, so why are law they not allowed to practice it?

Once again, this is how I see it. No offense to Law Enforcement by any means, I appreciate what you do. I just wish I could do my part for my own preservation of life if I had to instead of you having to arrive at a distress call with a victim on the ground and writing that report.

10-21-2013, 7:17 PM
OP, you might want to look at the Federalist papers to see if there is any reasoning or discussion behind this amendment by the Founders.

10-22-2013, 3:37 AM
i think there was a case defining that that allows areas to ignore the acts which it finds are shocking to community standards

Miller v. California

One "prong" of the so-called "Miller test" is whether an "average person, applying contemporary community standards", would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to prurient interests. It allows local law to slide the protection of the First Amendment backwards or forwards in the case of depictions of sexual activity. I suppose that the precedent could be used by the antis as a way to make local bans on certain firearms or method of carry constitutional. My gut tells it would be a last resort but I am not a lawyer (I do know a guy who played one on TV :cool:)