Subject:
|
Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 25 Jan 2007 03:27:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2931 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
| |
Hmmmm, founding fathers being exclusionary? The literal text really does
say what Gonzales says it does.
But then again, the literal text of the 2nd really does say that the guns
are for the ‘well oiled militia’
Interpretations be damned, I say. Let’s go for the literal text!!!
|
Well, you want your interpretation, and literal, too. Specter takes the
Constitution literally when he cites “except in the case of invasion or
rebellion”, but when Gonzales takes the Constitution literally, you cry
foul.
|
One problem there (among many) is that there has been no invasion and no
rebellion. A single attack does not an invasion make, so there is literally
no justification for suspension of habeas corpus.
Dave!
|
A single attack can make a rebellion if it is by a citizen of the country. I
can’t remember if any of the Sept 11 bombers were US citizens but if so I
would argue it indeed was a part of a rebellion.
|
Sorry, Tim--I missed your post, or I would have responded earlier.
DaveE has already offered good thoughts on this point, but I’d go in a slightly
different direction. In my view, a rebellion necessarily consists of a viably
large body of rebels, the majority of whom are citizens of the nation against
which they are rebelling. The 9/11 hijackers don’t fit this definition at all.
By that token, any US soldier in Iraq (or Afghanistan) can be incarcerated
indefinitely on the grounds that he or she is, by attacking in that country, is
guilty of rebellion.
Also, a rebellion needs to be a sustained effort. One attack (or two, separated
by eight years) simply doesn’t qualify.
Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Where's Larry and Hoppy when you need 'em???
|
| (...) If most of them weren't US citizens then I agree with the latter part of this argument. With Terror tactics and WMDs (such as a Boeing 747) then a viable body of rebels doesn't have to be large. Were the hijackers US citizens by and large then (...) (18 years ago, 25-Jan-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
115 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
|
|
|
|
