Subject:
|
Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Jul 2001 17:34:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
438 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
>
> > Amend the constitution? Great. Ignore it, interpret it in direct conflict
> > with what the founders intended(1)? Nope, not going to support that.
> >
> > 1 - to pick just one example... the interstate commerce clause, introduced
> > to ensure that states did not impose tariffs on each others goods by
> > reserving the right to do so to Congress, has been used to justify
> > regulating anything for any conceivable reason. Not the intent.
>
> This is another example in which it's useful to recall the context of the
> 18th century vs. the context of today. "Interstate" and "commerce" had
> strikingly different meanings back then, I suspect, or at least strikingly
> different applications.
Do tell... I'm rather at a loss on how there is a difference in the meanings
of such fundamental terms. Rather, this was a deliberate misconstruing, done
knowingly by Congress. Kind of like how Michigan's Right to Carry law was
made referendum proof by attaching a minor appropriations bill to it
(Michigan constitution prevents referendums on money bills). A slimy way to
achieve an outcome but in this case I'm happy because it broke the gun board
monopoly (in which only cronies got permits).
> Is there a document clearly delineating the
> "intent" of the authors,
The best we have available are the Federalist Papers. Since they are
polemical and propaganda written (some of) the drafters to influence
adoption, they are not perfect. But they are a fascinating read, even at a
200+ year remove.
I recommend them to all critical thinkers who want to have a more informed
debate, and have done so in the past when we have gotten into "what did the
founders intend" sorts of questions which are always hard to deal with.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
| (...) Well, for one thing, "commerce" included the sale of human beings, so while "commerce" still meant "trade in goods and/or services," the application of that word was materially different. Similarly, "interstate" transactions completed today in (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
| (...) Well, you won't catch me defending the later politics of one A. Hamilton, but we also have Madison's Notes on the Convention, don't we? (URL) you can find The Federalist at: (URL) Hop-Frog (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Handgun Death Rate
|
| (...) This is another example in which it's useful to recall the context of the 18th century vs. the context of today. "Interstate" and "commerce" had strikingly different meanings back then, I suspect, or at least strikingly different applications. (...) (23 years ago, 18-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
182 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
