No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers ***NO POLITICS
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting~The Pen and Quill

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum~ Fermenter's Forum


~~~ Dobbins' Products Catalog ~~~


Minnesota Trapline Products
Please support our sponsor for the Trappers Talk Page - Minnesota Trapline Products


Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: James] #6878482
05/21/20 01:08 PM
05/21/20 01:08 PM
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,211
Co.-Wy. part time AK.
W
wy.wolfer Offline
trapper
wy.wolfer  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,211
Co.-Wy. part time AK.
Originally Posted by James
I don't know how you could prove a judge intentionally violated the Constitution.

Constitutional questions can be rationalized every which way. The Constitution is susceptible to different interpretations.

Jim

Jefferson referred to the Constitution as a living document, and went on to explain his thought process that included it could change for the good of the country or the benefit of the citizenry. This depends entirely upon whose opinion is well intentioned , or if they have an agenda to deprive other citizens of rights they hold dear. Politicians in general should not be EXPECTED to adequately protect the meaning and re-interpretation.

Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878559
05/21/20 04:21 PM
05/21/20 04:21 PM
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,683
Newark, Ohio 83 years
Actor Offline
trapper
Actor  Offline
trapper

Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,683
Newark, Ohio 83 years
Ask 10 judges to explain to you the "Right of Eminent Domain". Their answers will most often be aligned with whose pockets will be lined with the 10 pieces of silver, and who paid for his campaign.

Garry-

Last edited by Actor; 05/21/20 04:22 PM.

“Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.”

Have been trapping 77 years…
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878565
05/21/20 04:36 PM
05/21/20 04:36 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 21,543
Sandhills Nebraska
G
Gary Benson Offline
trapper
Gary Benson  Offline
trapper
G

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 21,543
Sandhills Nebraska
The rogue judge right now is the one presiding over the Michael Flynn case. After the prosecution decided they had no evidence and withdrew, the judge decided to keep it going by himself and HE is the jury, prosecuter, and judge. Could be interesting but will likely go away quietly and be swept under the rug by the MSM.


Life ain't supposed to be easy.
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: KeithC] #6878570
05/21/20 04:44 PM
05/21/20 04:44 PM
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,105
7mtns of CENTRAL PA
GROUSEWIT Offline
trapper
GROUSEWIT  Offline
trapper

Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,105
7mtns of CENTRAL PA
Originally Posted by KeithC
If judges commit treason by intentionally violating the US Constitution, they should be legally tried and if convicted, executed.

Keith


How's the song go? Find a tall oak 🌳.... an a rope.....


NRALIFER,PRPA LIFER,HUNTER,FURTAKER
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878794
05/21/20 09:59 PM
05/21/20 09:59 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
Originally Posted by HobbieTrapper
Is the Constitution really open to interpretation?


Of course it is. I don't find the Second Amendment as clear and unambiguous as you folks think. Why didn't the framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights say:

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Instead, they wrote:

"A well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Seems to me that you're saying the two sentences mean the same thing.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878796
05/21/20 10:02 PM
05/21/20 10:02 PM
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 10,479
Iowa
T
trapdog1 Offline
trapper
trapdog1  Offline
trapper
T

Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 10,479
Iowa
There are lots of ways to say the same thing.

Re: Rogue Judges [Re: James] #6878807
05/21/20 10:15 PM
05/21/20 10:15 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
HobbieTrapper Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"
HobbieTrapper  Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
Originally Posted by James
Originally Posted by HobbieTrapper
Is the Constitution really open to interpretation?


Of course it is. I don't find the Second Amendment as clear and unambiguous as you folks think. Why didn't the framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights say:

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Instead, they wrote:

"A well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Seems to me that you're saying the two sentences mean the same thing.

Jim


Sounds pretty clear to me. They stated the reason the people’s right to bear shall not be infringed prior to.

They could have easily said the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because it maybe necessary for the state to protect itself from the federal government.


-Goofy-
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878820
05/21/20 10:34 PM
05/21/20 10:34 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
"...the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because it maybe necessary for the state to protect itself from the federal government."

That's not what the Second says, though.

Maybe you should have been at the table when they were drafting it. lol

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878825
05/21/20 10:37 PM
05/21/20 10:37 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
HobbieTrapper Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"
HobbieTrapper  Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
That’s exactly what it says only the reason is noted prior to the right.

The only realistic thing to threaten a state’s freedom is the federal government.

Last edited by HobbieTrapper; 05/21/20 10:37 PM.

-Goofy-
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878829
05/21/20 10:38 PM
05/21/20 10:38 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
Seems to me the Civil War settled that issue.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878838
05/21/20 10:47 PM
05/21/20 10:47 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
HobbieTrapper Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"
HobbieTrapper  Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
Then why didn’t the winner change the Constitution then?


-Goofy-
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878858
05/21/20 11:12 PM
05/21/20 11:12 PM
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,922
east central WI
D
Dirty D Offline
trapper
Dirty D  Offline
trapper
D

Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,922
east central WI
Seems to me we should have judges removed from the bench when their rulings are excessively overturned by higher courts. I'd say 25% overturn rate is fair.

That would be a start.
Trouble is the supreme court has ruled against the constitution many times. And their bad rulings make big differences.

Wickard v. Filburn is great example of a bad ruling that violated constition and has given the feds much more power than they should have.

For those of you a simple summary of the above ruling is the Court ruled that a Farmer growing wheat to feed his own livestock was a violation of "interstate commerce".

Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878882
05/21/20 11:54 PM
05/21/20 11:54 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
Originally Posted by HobbieTrapper
Then why didn’t the winner change the Constitution then?


Because you're wrong.

The use of "state" in the Second Amendment doesn't refer to the fifty states (or 13), but means nation.

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: James] #6878889
05/22/20 12:03 AM
05/22/20 12:03 AM
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 10,421
mn north of blakely
S
Steven 49er Offline
trapper
Steven 49er  Offline
trapper
S

Joined: May 2010
Posts: 10,421
mn north of blakely
Originally Posted by James
"...the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because it maybe necessary for the state to protect itself from the federal government."

That's not what the Second says, though.

Maybe you should have been at the table when they were drafting it. lol

Jim


We may not have sat at the table but what we do have is their writings and the examples they set.

Do you think men who risked everything they have, their families and their lives to birth a new nation whose ideals of liberty were unheard of at that time would entertain the thought it was okay to allow a government to take away the tools they used to deliver that birth?

It's utter nonsense to believe so.


"Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon". Milton Friedman.
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878904
05/22/20 12:21 AM
05/22/20 12:21 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
Steven, where did I ever say that?

Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: James] #6878907
05/22/20 12:32 AM
05/22/20 12:32 AM
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,459
Oregon
H
H2ORat Offline
trapper
H2ORat  Offline
trapper
H

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,459
Oregon
Originally Posted by James
Originally Posted by HobbieTrapper
Is the Constitution really open to interpretation?


Of course it is. I don't find the Second Amendment as clear and unambiguous as you folks think. Why didn't the framers of the Constitution and Bill of Rights say:

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Instead, they wrote:

"A well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Seems to me that you're saying the two sentences mean the same thing.

Jim

because alot of them were doctors and lawyers, it takes them a paragraph to say a sentence. -- alot like paul in the bible.

Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6878939
05/22/20 03:30 AM
05/22/20 03:30 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
J
James Offline
"Minka"
James  Offline
"Minka"
J

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 17,379
Coeur d' Alene, Idaho
LOL.


Jim


Forum Infidel since 2001

"And that troll bs is something triggered snowflakes say when they dont like what someone posts." - Boco
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: James] #6878949
05/22/20 04:36 AM
05/22/20 04:36 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
HobbieTrapper Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"
HobbieTrapper  Offline OP
"Chippendale Trapper"

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 28,715
Eastern Shore of Maryland
Originally Posted by James
Originally Posted by HobbieTrapper
Then why didn’t the winner change the Constitution then?


Because you're wrong.

The use of "state" in the Second Amendment doesn't refer to the fifty states (or 13), but means nation.

Jim


Go figure, we need preachers to tell us what the Bible means and lawyers to tell us what the Constitution means......

And


We have to pay both of them to do so.


Yup, I’m certain that’s what the Founders intended.

BTW, “You’re wrong”, indicates that the Constitution IS NOT open to interpretation. lol

Last edited by HobbieTrapper; 05/22/20 05:39 AM.

-Goofy-
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: HobbieTrapper] #6879000
05/22/20 07:02 AM
05/22/20 07:02 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 29,751
williamsburg ks
D
danny clifton Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
danny clifton  Offline
"Grumpy Old Man"
D

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 29,751
williamsburg ks
All I k n o w is I will never ask anybody for permission to be armed, to say what I think, to hold to my religious belief. So interpret away, pass laws, whatever you feel is right. Won't stop me from those things.


Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790)
Re: Rogue Judges [Re: Steven 49er] #6879050
05/22/20 08:10 AM
05/22/20 08:10 AM
Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 9,917
Arkansas
J
J Staton Offline
trapper
J Staton  Offline
trapper
J

Joined: Aug 2012
Posts: 9,917
Arkansas
Originally Posted by Steven 49er
Originally Posted by James
"...the people’s right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed because it maybe necessary for the state to protect itself from the federal government."

That's not what the Second says, though.

Maybe you should have been at the table when they were drafting it. lol

Jim


We may not have sat at the table but what we do have is their writings and the examples they set.

Do you think men who risked everything they have, their families and their lives to birth a new nation whose ideals of liberty were unheard of at that time would entertain the thought it was okay to allow a government to take away the tools they used to deliver that birth?

It's utter nonsense to believe so.

The Anti-Federalists gave you the Bill of Rights because they feared a large central government. The Federalist believed in a strong central government but did not believe it necessary for the Bill of Rights to be included in the Constitution, since their thoughts were the same as what the tenth amendment states.
If it is perceived, by lawyers and judges, that the words written in amendments don't mean what the words mean, can you imagine the heyday judges,lawyers, and politicians would have if they weren't in the Constitution. Be thankful the Anti Federalist won that argument.

Last edited by J Staton; 05/22/20 08:18 AM.

James 1: 19-20
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread