|
FrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: HagbardCeline]
#6655724 - 03/10/07 01:17 PM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Section 8: The Congress shall have power
to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
Wikipedia article.
--------------------
 "Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin
Edited by FrenchSocialist (03/10/07 01:17 PM)
|
FrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: fireworks_god]
#6655729 - 03/10/07 01:21 PM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
fireworks_god said: His presentations concerning the Constitiution of the United States are based upon quotations of interpretations of the Constituation propagated by an organization for gun control,
Their arguments are actually supported by Supreme Court rulings. Not all sources are equal just because they are opposed.
Quote:
fireworks_god said: and a Wikipedia article that is currently defaced with a malicious edit.
Wikipedia is self-correcting.
Quote:
fireworks_god said:Clearly the statement in the Constitution is open to interpretation. The Judicial Branch is given the power to decide how to interpret the Constitution with what they have to consider. The Judicial Branch kicks ass.
And the Supreme Court is the highest level of the Judicial Branch.
--------------------
 "Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 1 month
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: FrenchSocialist]
#6655734 - 03/10/07 01:27 PM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
FrenchSocialist said: Wikipedia is self-correcting.
I know that, I just thought it was hilarious that someone did that.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs




Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 3 months, 29 days
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: FrenchSocialist]
#6660962 - 03/12/07 10:11 AM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Let's not forget about this gem:
Quote:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, no prohibited by it to the the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
The Constitution never explicitly states that the federal gov't has a monopoly on firearms, nor has the ability to take firearms from citizens.
|
Life_of_a_Cell

Registered: 05/29/04
Posts: 242
Last seen: 5 years, 6 months
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: Redstorm]
#6661159 - 03/12/07 12:02 PM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
This is an issue on which I don't have a settled opinion, though I'm certainly leaning more in the direction of constitutionally guaranteed personal ownership of firearms.
I do wonder though, where this right ends? Clearly we do not want private entities to have nuclear or biological weapons, but if a law-abiding, registered, properly trained gun owner wants to keep an assault rifle or 5 dozen around the house I'm not sure I object to that immediately.
But what about individuals owning tanks or fighter planes? Mobile rocket trucks that can spray a wide area with shrapnel? Automated mini-guns? I think that there is a spectrum of narrowing acceptibility in most things, but legal cases require a stark and often arbitrary cut-off point. Where does that point lie?
|
FrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: Redstorm]
#6661907 - 03/12/07 03:56 PM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said: The Constitution never explicitly states that the federal gov't has a monopoly on firearms, nor has the ability to take firearms from citizens.
I don't see the point of your criticism. We're talking about whether or not the Second Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to carry firearms.
--------------------
 "Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin
|
z@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: FrenchSocialist]
#6671185 - 03/14/07 11:54 PM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
FrenchSocialist said: But that applies to well-regulated militias, not individuals. Now at days, that is the equivalent to the national guard.
The comma separates ideas. It specifically mentions the right of the people. It is in no way cryptic. The people had just ended a war on the state militia so why exactly would a group of people who just fought the state grant it a monopoly on the use of arms? Why would one amendment out of ten give rights to the state when the other 9 limit it?
-------------------- "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
|
z@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: FrenchSocialist]
#6671255 - 03/15/07 12:14 AM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
FrenchSocialist said: Did the Court present any actual argument for why they interpreted the Second Amendment in such a manner?
First of all you are wrong. Second the french have already surrendered.
-------------------- "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson
|
FrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: z@z.com]
#6671271 - 03/15/07 12:17 AM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
z@z.com said:
Quote:
FrenchSocialist said: But that applies to well-regulated militias, not individuals. Now at days, that is the equivalent to the national guard.
The comma separates ideas. It specifically mentions the right of the people. It is in no way cryptic. The people had just ended a war on the state militia so why exactly would a group of people who just fought the state grant it a monopoly on the use of arms? Why would one amendment out of ten give rights to the state when the other 9 limit it?
You do realize that it would have been impossible for the Second Amendment to apply to individuals across the entire nation before the Civil War.
--------------------
 "Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin
Edited by FrenchSocialist (03/15/07 12:20 AM)
|
FrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: z@z.com]
#6671315 - 03/15/07 12:28 AM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
z@z.com said: Second the french have already surrendered.
Nah that's just what we want them to think.
--------------------
 "Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin
|
SirTripAlot
Semper Fidelis


Registered: 01/11/05
Posts: 7,523
Loc: Harmless (Mostly)
Last seen: 1 hour, 21 minutes
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: FrenchSocialist]
#6674756 - 03/15/07 09:43 PM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
If you do not understand that, then you need to re read the 10th Amendment, and its implications.
-------------------- “I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”
|
FrenchSocialist
DarwinianLeftist

Registered: 08/02/06
Posts: 883
Last seen: 16 years, 7 months
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: SirTripAlot]
#6675572 - 03/16/07 01:31 AM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
What is your point?
--------------------
 "Both liberty and equality are among the primary goals pursued by human beings through many centuries; but total liberty for wolves is death to the lambs" -- Isaiah Berlin
|
kotik
fuckingsuperhero


Registered: 06/29/04
Posts: 3,531
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
Re: You mean a court backed up the Constitution? [Re: FrenchSocialist]
#6675873 - 03/16/07 05:48 AM (16 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
FrenchSocialist said: But that applies to well-regulated militias, not individuals. Now at days, that is the equivalent to the national guard.
no, it says "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
the people is not the same as a militia. Militias exist as well, however I would imagine every single one is being monitored by the FBI on a constant basis - just a little preview of how the post-1800s government of ours views the constitution.
-------------------- No statements made in any post or message by myself should be construed to mean that I am now, or have ever been, participating in or considering participation in any activities in violation of any local, state, or federal laws. All posts are works of fiction.
|
|