Subject:
|
Re: An armed society...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 23 Jan 2002 19:59:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1142 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> The Federal Government is within its power, as enumerated by the
> Constitution, to legislate a full ban on private ownership of arms. If you
> object to the Federal Government's exercise of that power, then your beef is
> with the Constitution, and not with the Fed.
Dave, your post is too full of errors to take on as a whole so I picked just
this one spot. I think it is also an erroneous statement. I could
certainly mount arguments that would show that the second amendment is
indeed a protection to keep and bear arms. I could also show that
amendments 9 and 10 likewise protect well recognized rights not otherwise
enumerated in the constitution. If the federal govt. takes away my ability
to keep and bear arms, my beef will be with them and not some moldy old
document.
Reality check: we have the right to keep and bear arms in the U.S., and we
have since day one. If you want to argue for greater controls on arms, or
even a complete ban -- at least recognize that your starting point is within
a nation that has made the keeping and bearing of arms an ethic deeply
connected to its own origins and concepts of freedom.
I happen to think that it's laughable that the second amendment is not well
understood to protect the individual's right right to keep and bear arms.
Talk about disinformation...
BTW, the Supreme Court does not have the final say as to what is or is not
law in the U.S -- the people do. The people control govt. by voting, by
making our needs and opinions well understood, and by sitting as jurors
(i.e. jury nullification). I give you the words of the first Supreme Court
Justice, John Jay, in the famous case of State of Georgia v. Brailsford, et
al., 3 U.S. 1 (Dall.) (1794):
... on questions of fact, it is the province of the jury, on questions of
law, it is the province of the court to decide. But it must be observed that
by the same law, which recognizes this reasonable distribution of
jurisdiction, you have nevertheless a right to take upon yourselves to judge
of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy. On
this, and on every other occasion, however, we have no doubt, you will pay
that respect, which is due to the opinion of the court: For, as on the one
hand, it is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on
the other hand, presumbable, that the court are the best judges of the law.
But still both objects are lawfully, within your power of decision.
So yeah, the Supreme Court can do a lot of things when it comes to
adjudicating minute issues of law. When it comes to protecting my freedoms,
I look to my fellows. Or at least I SHOULD be able to do so, if any of them
even had even a clue about the nature of their own govt. and their rights. I
am smart enough to know that I cannot currently seat a jury of 12
well-informed, freedom-loving people to sit in judgement over me or my ideas.
That's pretty sad.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: An armed society...
|
| (...) Then it's odd that the NRA, the most vociferous and organized proponents of so-called gun rights, has never brought a case successfully before the Supreme Court, despite numerous opportunities to try. You are of course correct regarding the (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: An armed society...
|
| (...) But according to the Constitution, it is the Court that is empowered to interpret the law. (...) I've had a small and far-too-late epiphany on this matter, or at least on how to articulate my feelings about it, so I think I might finally have (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
179 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
|
|
|
|
