Now do you suppose the Founding Fathers envisioned

zymurgy said:
this is not true. plenty of challenges to state law were heard in the 100 plus years before the 1r4th was ratified - but no state court ever looked at the 2nd amendment because the law was well understood back then

I already posted an example in 1839. states used their own constitution to decide if the laws were just - not the 2nd amendment
Click to expand...

This is a non-sequitur. The constitution currently allows me to own and bear arms, the right is an individual one, the 14th extended that right to also limit the states. At this point in time there are two ways to change this reality. I have provided you the map. You just saying stuff here will never change it, it is just posturing so you can pretend to claim a moral high ground that you will never do the hard work to actually seize. If you think it is wrong for me to have a right to own and bear arms then you need to Amend the constitution to get that done, either by removing the incorporation of the 14th for this one right or by simply negating the right.

I know this has begun to sound like I'm repeating myself, but that's only because you insist on repeating yourself.

Right now I have a right, if you don't want me to have it you must Amend that right out of the constitution otherwise "men in robes" that can read english will rule that I have a right to own and bear arms.
 
Damocles said:
This is a non-sequitur. The constitution currently allows me to own and bear arms, the right is an individual one, the 14th extended that right to also limit the states.
Click to expand...

the 14th was ratified in 1868

men changed the interpretation of it in 1910


So human interpretation can undo this, which means the non-sequitur is all you. I don't need to amend, I need to clarify intent
 
zymurgy said:
the 14th was ratified in 1868

men changed the interpretation of it in 1910


So human interpretation can undo this, which means the non-sequitur is all you. I don't need to amend, I need to clarify intent
Click to expand...

Not permanently. You continue to repeat this nonsense. If you want to make it so "men in robes" cannot rule that I have a right to this then there are only two paths to get there, both of which I provided a map for you to get done.

Posture and grunt, pretend you have some moral high ground, get red in the face and hope that someday enough justices will agree with you in perpetuity that it will never be decided again... or

Face reality. The only way you can insure I do not have this right guaranteed by the 2nd and incorporated by the 14th is to remove the right from the constitution with the 28th Amendment or a Constitutional Convention to rewrite the constitution without that right in it...
 
Damocles said:
Not permanently. You continue to repeat this nonsense. If you want to make it so "men in robes" cannot rule that I have a right to this then there are only two paths to get there, both of which I provided a map for you to get done.

Posture and grunt, pretend you have some moral high ground, get red in the face and hope that someday enough justices will agree with you in perpetuity that it will never be decided again... or

Face reality. The only way you can insure I do not have this right guaranteed by the 2nd and incorporated by the 14th is to remove the right from the constitution with the 28th Amendment or a Constitutional Convention to rewrite the constitution without that right in it...
Click to expand...
posture and grunt?

I notice you always get quite insensitive when I point out you are wrong about something.

like in this case when you claimed I am forced to amend, which is not true
 
zymurgy said:
posture and grunt?

I notice you always get quite insensitive when I point out you are wrong about something.

like in this case when you claimed I am forced to amend, which is not true
Click to expand...

Except you have yet to find one thing I was wrong about. Every single time the only response I have given is to change this reality there are only two paths to get there, and so far you have given no response that changed anything about what I stated.

The reality is. If you want it so that I do not have this right you need to change the constitution with an Amendment or through the Constitutional Convention process (both of which are the paths that you can make this change given in the Constitution).

Otherwise everything you say is posturing. Insisting really hard isn't going to get you there, the only path that will get you there and ensure it sticks is by following the map given in the Constitution of the United States. Either change it so that nobody can rule that my Federal rights are incorporated (take power from the feds) or remove the 2nd by Amending the constitution.
 
zymurgy said:
in a 5-4 decision they "found" that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms", as protected under the Second Amendment, is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment and is thereby enforceable against the states.

you won't find a single case prior to the 14th that said the 2nd amendment constrained a state. States all had much older constitutions dealing with these laws
Click to expand...

The 2nd amendment has always applied to the States. The 14th amendment did not change anything there.
 
zymurgy said:
the founders did not intend the 2nd amendment to apply to the states at all - and it didn't apply to the states for over a 100 years.
Click to expand...

You don't get to speak for the dead. You only get to speak for yourself. Omniscience fallacy.

The 2nd amendment applies to all levels of government, including the States. It always has.
 
Damocles said:
The founders didn't incorporate our rights to the states, however the 14th Amendment did, thus the constitution itself does... This means that the rights I have as a citizen of the United States are also protected from the State's exercise of power now. Before that some states had state religions, for instance... they can't now.

Again, if you want this to change you need the 28th Amendment, not just saying stuff on this board. If you want to change this reality then you need to amend the constitution otherwise everything you say or do is just posturing so you can "feel" good.
Click to expand...

States can have state religions, IF their own constitutions authorize it (currently none do). The 1st amendment does not apply to the States.
 
Flash said:
They don't override the Constitution. You are only referring to your interpretation of the Constitution which is not part of our legal doctrine. You don't get to determine the meaning the document. We have elected/appointed officials legally authorized to make those decisions. They obviously differ from your views which are contrary to history and accepted interpretations. Read some court decisions.
Click to expand...

No court has authority to change the Constitution. No elected official has authority to change the Constitution.
 
zymurgy said:
this is not true. plenty of challenges to state law were heard in the 100 plus years before the 14th was ratified - but no state court ever looked at the 2nd amendment because the law was well understood back then, and the federal courts understood it was not their role to intervene

I already posted an example in 1839. states used their own constitution to decide if the laws were just - not the 2nd amendment


mq6Tm.jpg
Click to expand...

It is unconstitutional to ban or limit any guns.
 
Damocles said:
This is a non-sequitur. The constitution currently allows me to own and bear arms, the right is an individual one, the 14th extended that right to also limit the states. At this point in time there are two ways to change this reality. I have provided you the map. You just saying stuff here will never change it, it is just posturing so you can pretend to claim a moral high ground that you will never do the hard work to actually seize. If you think it is wrong for me to have a right to own and bear arms then you need to Amend the constitution to get that done, either by removing the incorporation of the 14th for this one right or by simply negating the right.

I know this has begun to sound like I'm repeating myself, but that's only because you insist on repeating yourself.

Right now I have a right, if you don't want me to have it you must Amend that right out of the constitution otherwise "men in robes" that can read english will rule that I have a right to own and bear arms.
Click to expand...

The 14th amendment did not 'extend' the 2nd amendment to the States. It has ALWAYS applied to the States.
 
zymurgy said:
the 14th was ratified in 1868

men changed the interpretation of it in 1910


So human interpretation can undo this, which means the non-sequitur is all you. I don't need to amend, I need to clarify intent
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. The 2nd amendment has always applied to the States.
 
Damocles said:
Not permanently. You continue to repeat this nonsense. If you want to make it so "men in robes" cannot rule that I have a right to this then there are only two paths to get there, both of which I provided a map for you to get done.

Posture and grunt, pretend you have some moral high ground, get red in the face and hope that someday enough justices will agree with you in perpetuity that it will never be decided again... or

Face reality. The only way you can insure I do not have this right guaranteed by the 2nd and incorporated by the 14th is to remove the right from the constitution with the 28th Amendment or a Constitutional Convention to rewrite the constitution without that right in it...
Click to expand...

That still does not remove the right of self defense. That is inherent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top