Because those states were divided in pro and anti-Confederate opinion, and voted (sometimes narrowly) against secession.
guns
Yes and no. Even though there was institutional slavery, but there was discrimination even in the north. Exslaves also had to be careful because under Fugitive laws they could be considered property and returned to the plantation owners.
They could get more representation in the House that way, even though otherwise slaves were not considered people but were just property.
Kentucky, Missouri, Maryland, Delaware. Ironically, slavery (but not slave-trading) was still lawful in the District of Columbia, though there were very few slaves there. Also, there was the new state of West Virginia, created in mid-war when the Western counties of Virginia seceded from Virginia, and offered their loyalty to the Union. The new state was not entirely slave-free.
The British-Americans finished taking slavery into Texas when they crossed the Mississippi River and brought their slaves with them. Spain originally owned Texas and had some slaves, though it wasn't the normal until people crossed the river from the other southern states.
Borders do not secede though some states did.
guns
None of the Border States seceded even though they were slave states.
Obama is still in office because he was elected by a majority of the American people. Even though there are petitions from thirty states to secede, the largest amount of signatures is 40,000 from Texas. At this time, there is simply no reason for The President of the United States to be removed from office.
Yes. In all 11 Southern states officially seceded. Two others Kentucky and Missouri, were sypathetic toward the southern cause but did not ultimately secede from the Union. Even though these two states did not secede, they are both recognized on the Confederate battle flag.
The Northern States and Canada, but I don't know what the Northern States are though!
because
Technically, in the South; slavery had already been essentially abolished in the North, and during the Civil War (as opposed to afterward) the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the rebellious states... i.e., the South... even though Lincoln couldn't enforce it at the time, them being, well, rebellious and all.(Slaves in states like Missouri, which was a slave state that did not secede from the Union, were not freed by the Emancipation Proclamation.)
The answer you're probably looking for is Washington, Oregon, and California, which are the states in the conterminous US that border the Pacific Ocean ... though Alaska and Hawaii are further west.
because he issued the Emancipation Proclaimation that applied to slave states that left the Union. he wanted the border states to stay loyal to the Union and besides.... the border states never did secession anyways. hope this helps! :)
To get both the northern and southern states to agree to it. The southern states wanted slaves counted in the population for determining representation in Congress (even though slaves couldn't vote). The northern states wanted them excluded.
Missouri, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Nebraska border Iowa. no oceans do though.