Federal judge rules Oregon’s tough new gun law is constitutional

[Into the Night]

So when there is a dispute with the constitution and a law then how do you propose to solve it?

Just ignore it since nobody has the authority to determine what the constitution means?

I never said no one has authority over the Constitution. I've said quite the opposite. The States and only the States have any authority over the Constitution of the United States.
The Constitution is written in plain English. You don't have to 'determine what the Constitution means'.

Any 'law' in conflict with the Constitution has no force.

 

[Into the Night]

only one entity gets to decide what the Constitution means. Judges get to review and interpret LAWS, not the Constitution. If they interpret that the LAW violates the plain written text of the Constitution, then that's what they decide.

The founders did NOT prescribe limited powers to the federal government and then hand that federal government the keys to define the limits of their prescribed powers.

Exactly.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

judging those in the past by our current status quo is a sign of a weak mind.


we have a jury system that decides


the supremeacy clause only applies when the same powers, fed and state, conflict. you should read the 10th Amendment


every state Constitution i've ever read specifically assigns powers to state legislatures to regulate public roadways, i.e. set speed limits. so your premise is false.

So if you lived back then you would not have argued against slavery and told them it was wrong?

Good thing a lot of people didn't think like you.

 

[Into the Night]

You realize the constitution is not that clear on many issues.

It is completely clear.

So who decides when the constitution isn't clear?

I suggest you learn the purpose of any constitution, what it does, and learn the English language.

For instance, are concealed weapons allowed per the constitution?

Yes.

It doesn't say so but it doesn't say they aren't.

It does say so. See the Article I and the 2nd amendment. Also see the 9th and 10th amendments.

So what do you do then?

The Constitution does not give rights. That is not the purpose of the Constitution.

The purpose of any constitution is to define and declare a government, giving it certain limited powers. It has NO power or authority out of what the Constitution specifically gives it.

You are arguing for an oligarchy, giving the Supreme Court power over everything, and discarding the Constitution by doing so.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

It is completely clear.

I suggest you learn the purpose of any constitution, what it does, and learn the English language.

Yes.

It does say so. See the Article I and the 2nd amendment. Also see the 9th and 10th amendments.

The Constitution does not give rights. That is not the purpose of the Constitution.

The purpose of any constitution is to define and declare a government, giving it certain limited powers. It has NO power or authority out of what the Constitution specifically gives it.

Constitutions do not give rights, they take away rights.

We had rights to everything before constitutions limited them.

I had a right to carry a gun before the constitution was written, now I have restrictions against it.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

I never said no one has authority over the Constitution. I've said quite the opposite. The States and only the States have any authority over the Constitution of the United States.
The Constitution is written in plain English. You don't have to 'determine what the Constitution means'.

Any 'law' in conflict with the Constitution has no force.

Printz vs. US

Can a state regulate handgun sales under the necessary and proper clause per the constitution?

 

[Into the Night]

1. The founders kept slavery, I wouldn't have so yes I am smarter.

Not an indication of intelligence. Presentism fallacy.

2. So if "we the people" decide what is constitutional you want a popular vote on every issue involving the constitution?

SmarterthanYou is slightly in error here. The States and only the States have authority over the Constitution. The people have that authority as extensions of States.
He is NOT describing a democracy. The United States is NOT a democracy.

The Constitution of the United States is the ONLY authoritative reference of the Constitution of the United States.

3. State constitutions do not overrule the federal constitution per the supremacy clause.

No, they don't. You should, however, read the 9th and 10th amendments and Article I.

4. So it's not constitutional for a a state to set speed limits.

It is. That authority is given in various State constitutions. The federal government may also set speed limits, but only on federal roads (freeways). A State may override that speed limit since that road is within that State.

If a state does you could take them to court and argue it's not constitutional per your argument.

It is constitutional. Read read some State constitutions.

You may also set a speed limit on any road you own, just like the State can, and just like the federal government can.

 

[Into the Night]

So if you lived back then you would not have argued against slavery and told them it was wrong?

Good thing a lot of people didn't think like you.

Presentism fallacy. Attempted proof by contrivance.

 

[Into the Night]

Constitutions do not give rights, they take away rights.

No, they don't.

We had rights to everything before constitutions limited them.

You still do.

I had a right to carry a gun before the constitution was written, now I have restrictions against it.

Not because of the Constitution. You cannot blame the Constitution for the tyranny of the Democrats and other hoplophobics.

 

[Into the Night]

Printz vs. US

Can a state regulate handgun sales under the necessary and proper clause per the constitution?

No. That clause does not grant any authority or power, other than to make laws that conform with the Constitution of the United States and that State constitution.
That clause is not a general grant of power and cannot be used to discard the Constitution.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

No. That clause does not grant any authority or power, other than to make laws that conform with the Constitution of the United States and that State constitution.
That clause is not a general grant of power and cannot be used to discard the Constitution.

Well since there is no one to define it how do you know?

I say it does, you say it doesn't, who settles it?

 

[Yakuda]

Hello guno,



Oregon just got safer.

How? Oh thats right you think the criminals will run and hide now. Youre a deluded fuck stick you know that?

 

[SmarterthanYou]

So if you lived back then you would not have argued against slavery and told them it was wrong?

Good thing a lot of people didn't think like you.

that's a huge jump to a conclusion with no basis in fact off of what I said. I don't believe you're that simpleminded.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Constitutions do not give rights, they take away rights.

We had rights to everything before constitutions limited them.

I had a right to carry a gun before the constitution was written, now I have restrictions against it.

whoever taught you your history and civics classes did you a HUGE disservice.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Printz vs. US

Can a state regulate handgun sales under the necessary and proper clause per the constitution?

I don't believe you've read that opinion correctly......

Printz v. United States is a case decided on June 27, 1997, by the United States Supreme Court holding that it is unconstitutional to require state and local officials to conduct background checks on firearms purchasers.

 

[Damocles]

This, of course, opens the door for the SCOTUS to rule on individual rights to own and bear arms.

 

[martin]

I find it hilarious that you leftist morons THINK you KNOW what the 2nd Amendent means, yet have NO CLUE what it really means and you IGNORE irrefutable evidence provided to you about it, preferring your own mentally deficient desire

Clowns find many things hilarious they haven't the brains to take seriously. The posts just above your hilarity contain basic Second Amendment explanation.

 

[Tinkerpeach]

whoever taught you your history and civics classes did you a HUGE disservice.

Could you carry any gun you wanted before the constitution was written?

Yes or no.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Clowns find many things hilarious they haven't the brains to take seriously. The posts just above your hilarity contain basic Second Amendment explanation.

they are all wrong..............which allows us to understand the stupidity in your posts.

2nd Amendment is an individual right, SUPPOSED to be, uninfringed.............too many cowards out there need government to protect them...............which is never going to happen.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Could you carry any gun you wanted before the constitution was written?

Yes or no.

not that part you're wrong about.........but nice try. Do you need remedial classes on the Constitution? Or do you prefer to have people you believe to be smarter than you tell you what it means?