Does the Constitution allow any exceptions?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guns Guns Guns
  • Start date Start date
Don Quixote said:
scotus has from time to time reinterpreted the constitution and has not always covered itself with glory, for example the 'separate but equal' decision that it later reversed

however, until it rules otherwise, its decisions are the law of the land
Click to expand...
this is where people seriously err. the courts did not write the constitution, nor did congress or the president. we the people wrote the constitution and we the people decide how it's interpreted. It is why we can amend the constitution and employ jury nullification to overturn or ignore laws that are repugnant to the constitution or that violate the constitution.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
shall not be infringed, for all free men. inmates are not free, furthermore, in accordance with the 5th amendment "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law", inmates have had their due process of law. notice also that I believe once people are done serving time, their rights should be restored. there was a very good reason why that part of the 5th is in their, in order to avoid arguments about whether prisoners have a right to arms, or property, or validating the death penalty.
Click to expand...

The 2nd Amendment does not address whether anyone is free or not. Technically, being a member of a "regulated militia" it is expected that you may relinquish certain freedoms and live in a very socialized society as duty calls for you to do so.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
this is where people seriously err. the courts did not write the constitution, nor did congress or the president. we the people wrote the constitution and we the people decide how it's interpreted. It is why we can amend the constitution and employ jury nullification to overturn or ignore laws that are repugnant to the constitution or that violate the constitution.
Click to expand...

Unbelievable. You are so fucking ignorant.
 
Don Quixote said:
what a state high court says and what scotus says may be different, in which case scotus wins...however, until then the state has to abide by what its courts rule

ps according to the ca state constitution, slavery is still legal...

oh well
Click to expand...
this is incorrect as well. certain cases have come before the scotus where scotus has decided that some law didn't violate the constitution and remanded the case back to the state, where then said state supreme court has decided that their state constitution provides stronger protections of rights than federal and have kept their decision. the only time scotus can permanently override a state court is where any congressional powers come in to play.
 
enough said:
in all seriousness, does the constitution say "freemen"?

i find your argument about the 5th interesting. because i have seen and read that due process can be arbitrary and capricious. i don't recall your earlier comments referring to freemen...you may have...i just don't recall. but, doesn't that limit the "infringement" part? doesn't your argument necessarily mean that the right is not absolute?
Click to expand...

no and it doesn't have to because all men are considered free, as well as rights being absolute. i've seen the argument that if rights can be denied through due process, then they are not absolute and it's about as silly as the constitution being a living document because it can be amended. it's a silly argument that the founders would not have even listened to.
 
Gatorman said:
The 2nd Amendment does not address whether anyone is free or not. Technically, being a member of a "regulated militia" it is expected that you may relinquish certain freedoms and live in a very socialized society as duty calls for you to do so.
Click to expand...
this is a stupid argument, especially when it's based on what you 'feel'. the framers spelled out very clearly in the commentaries prior to ratification what the 2nd Amendment meant and a government managed unit is not it.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
this is incorrect as well. certain cases have come before the scotus where scotus has decided that some law didn't violate the constitution and remanded the case back to the state, where then said state supreme court has decided that their state constitution provides stronger protections of rights than federal and have kept their decision. the only time scotus can permanently override a state court is where any congressional powers come in to play.
Click to expand...

Bullshit. Federal law supersedes state law. States attempt to override periodically but they are always remanded to the federal law. It is a legal process and a tough one. That is why we have some states attempting to pass "person-hood" legislation but if passed that legislation will go before the SCOTUS and it will be struck down as are all of these anti-choice maneuvers. And many other federal laws are challenged and generally dismissed or clarified by the SCOTUS.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
this is incorrect as well. certain cases have come before the scotus where scotus has decided that some law didn't violate the constitution and remanded the case back to the state, where then said state supreme court has decided that their state constitution provides stronger protections of rights than federal and have kept their decision. the only time scotus can permanently override a state court is where any congressional powers come in to play.
Click to expand...

when scotus declines to hear a case or sends it back to a court, it is in fact deciding on the case in favor of the ruling court by default...

the constitution was not written by the people, but by a constitutional convention of people delegated by the people
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no and it doesn't have to because all men are considered free, as well as rights being absolute. i've seen the argument that if rights can be denied through due process, then they are not absolute and it's about as silly as the constitution being a living document because it can be amended. it's a silly argument that the founders would not have even listened to.
Click to expand...

You're a fucking idiot. You do realize that the Bill of Rights, our Constitutional Amendments, were written in 1791 don't you? Many of those "founders" were very much part of that process.
 
enough said:
don...i know you understand the point i was making. don't be obtuse.

didn't know that about CA. i'm pretty sure federal law trumps CA law on the issue.....ok....i googled it and couldn't find anything. what i did find was that the 1849 CA constitution BANNED slavery.

do you have a cite to back up your claim don?
Click to expand...

when i took a government class back in the 60's it was still so, the ca constitution must have been amended since then

there were/are a number of out of date or overridden laws in the ca state constitution that a group of people have been trying to delete from the ca constitution, but conservatives have blocked such efforts

i do not know why though, it seems like a no-brainer to me

oh well
 
Don Quixote said:
when scotus declines to hear a case or sends it back to a court, it is in fact deciding on the case in favor of the ruling court by default...
Click to expand...
also incorrect. Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz has the scotus deciding that sobriety checkpoints do not violate the 4th Amendment, so they reversed the decision of the michigan supreme court and remanded it back to them, where the michigan court immediately decided that their own constitution provided better 4th Amendment protections and overturned scotus. other states have had the same and decided that their own constitutions better protected the rights of their people and ignored supreme court rulings.

Don Quixote said:
the constitution was not written by the people, but by a constitutional convention of people delegated by the people
Click to expand...
and then voted by the people to approve up or down votes of the delegates. that's being written by we the people, unless you're just demanding to be that exact, in which case we can say that madison wrote the constitution, not the delegates.
 
Don Quixote said:
when i took a government class back in the 60's it was still so, the ca constitution must have been amended since then

there were/are a number of out of date or overridden laws in the ca state constitution that a group of people have been trying to delete from the ca constitution, but conservatives have blocked such efforts

i do not know why though, it seems like a no-brainer to me

oh well
Click to expand...

don....i said it was from 1849....so i fail to see how you were taught different in the the 1960's.

i hope you're ok bud. i like you.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no, i'm not admitting that and it's stupid of you to even go there.

1) a holstered gun is not a danger to the public
2) a right cannot be converted in to a crime
3) carrying a gun is a right

so you fail
Click to expand...

some states have ruled that carrying a holstered weapon is not allowed (unless it it is not loaded, but the cops will hassle you anyway...at least in ca)

has scotus ruled otherwise
 
Don Quixote said:
some states have ruled that carrying a holstered weapon is not allowed (unless it it is not loaded, but the cops will hassle you anyway...at least in ca)

has scotus ruled otherwise
Click to expand...
ca just last year made unloaded open carry illegal, which opened them up immediately to lawsuit which they will lose. Mcdonald v. chicago held that the right to keep AND BEAR arms was applied to the states, even though the lower courts have maintained that it only applies to bearing arms in ones own home. that will soon be dealt with as well.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no, you don't. you're looking like a total fullshit.ucktard twatwaffle because you don't know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...

I've made several points and asked several questions and you haven't addressed any of them, twatscum. I have at least attempted to address your ignorant assed bullshit and have been honest about doing so. Your lies remain simply lies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top