Democrats exist to undermine and violate the Constitution

[AProudLefty]

"...any person within its jurisdiction...."

[artichoke]

AProudLefty

Black Kitty Ain't Happy
This message is hidden because AProudLefty is on your ignore list.

Your IQ still isn't tall enough to ride this ride, butthurt stalker.

[AProudLefty]

Heh. He still thinks I've been talking to him.

[artichoke]

Still crying?

[SmarterthanYou]

Provably false. The Constitution even goes out of its way to distinguish people BORN in the U.S. from people who are "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Let alone people who just happen to be standing in the U.S. at the moment.

you are not reading the Constitution correctly. By your interpretation, I could shoot some canadian citizen in the head and not be held accountable because the canadian isn't subject to our constitution or laws

[Into the Night]

You're clueless, Arminius.
The problem with the constitution is not the rights that it sought to protect.
It's the incredibly stupid form of government that it gave us.

That being said, our perspectives as to that which constitutes desirable "freedom" are totally incompatible.
No republic can survive with this much ideological incompatibility, and ours won't for much longer either.

To: Arminius...QED

[Into the Night]

You're forgetting the Fourteenth Amendment, Section 1:



Democrats stand for "Equal Protection under the Law" for ALL AmeriCANs!

No, they don't.

[Into the Night]

Correct. And nine out of 10 Trumptards don't think protections extend to undocumented aliens. That's how stupid they are.

Bigotry. Void argument fallacy. Rights do not come from constitutions or any other piece of paper.

[Into the Night]

Yes, how "stupid" someone must be to correctly comprehend that the U.S. Constitution only has jurisdiction over, and only applies to, American citizens.

Do you ever get tired of demonstrating abject stupidity while calling other people stupid?

The Constitution does NOT apply to citizens OR illegal immigrants. It applies to GOVERNMENT.
The purpose of a constitution is to declare and define a government, and give it certain limited powers and authorities.

[Into the Night]

Does it protect the gun rights of Canadians? No. That would make no sense.

Constitutions do not give rights. No rights come from a piece of paper. It does not 'protect' rights. The purpose of a constitution is to define and declare a government, and to give it certain limited powers and authorities. That government has NO power or authority other than what that constitution specifically gives it.

The US Constitution also specifically prohibit government from passing any law curtailing certain specific rights as well...more as a clarification of boundaries than anything else. Nothing in the Constitution gave the government those powers in the first place.

[Into the Night]

this is an example of how people do not understand what the constitution does. It doesn't apply to Americans, it applies to the government, as in what they can and cannot do. as an example, if a canadian citizen comes to visit a relative in Arizona, they can legally carry a handgun without a license........if a canadian citizen comes to visit any other state, are they subject to the laws of our nation? yes.

Bingo.

[Into the Night]

Wrong. When the Constitution restrains the Federal Government from doing something, that is protecting the states and the individual. But it cannot restrain the Federal Government from violating the "rights" of people who aren't even citizens of this country. That doesn't even make sense. Canadians don't HAVE gun rights under our 2nd Amendment, because our 2nd Amendment obviously only protects citizens who are subject to U.S. jurisdiction.

Canadians DO have gun rights. No piece of paper gives that to them.
US citizens also have gun rights. No piece of paper gives that to them.

The 2nd amendment does not give any right.

The 2nd amendment discusses TWO related rights, that are related to each other. These rights are inherent. They are not granted by the 2nd amendment.
The inherent right of a State to defend itself. It does this by raising and organizing a militia. That well regulated militia is made up from the citizens of that State.
The inherent right of an individual to defend themselves. They do this by owning, and using arms (weapons). ANY kind of weapon.

The purpose of the 2nd amendment is to specifically remind the federal government, and the States, not to infringe on these rights. Nothing in any of these constitutions ever gave any government the authority to infringe on these rights in the first place.

[Into the Night]

Provably false. The Constitution even goes out of its way to distinguish people BORN in the U.S. from people who are "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Let alone people who just happen to be standing in the U.S. at the moment.

False equivalence fallacy. Contextomy fallacy. You cannot compare two different amendments as if they are the same clauses in the Constitution.

[Into the Night]

you are not reading the Constitution correctly. By your interpretation, I could shoot some canadian citizen in the head and not be held accountable because the canadian isn't subject to our constitution or laws

Quite right. You have a good eye, sir.

[Noone]

No, they don't.

Oh, yes they do. It's Trumpublicans that have issues with what's lawful.