No Amendment is Absolute.

Think about that for a moment. That right there would break the camels back...... Both sides of the aisle should be up in arms over that statement. The courts should be up in arms over that statement. Heck, every American should be up in arms over that statement!! One word comes to mind, how many died on the field for our FREEDOM.........

Obama.....(the lawyer's president) said that the Constitution is a worn out document that needs to be updated. That should concern everyone but the Dimocraps welcome it.

This country is going to come to blows, there's no way around it. A house divided against itself cannot stand.

The Constitution is the best document ever written. We the people should be upset because our elected officials are not following it.

he TAUGHT "Constitutional Law" in Chicago...

is it any wonder we're screwed?

unless we get involved in Big Education, Freedom will die at an ever-increasing velocity.

I'd wager 50% of Americans dont even know what the constitution is, much less anything about it.
I keep a copy on my desk, may have to start carrying one to show "officials" when the time comes.

When the time comes it won’t matter and most likely showing you even know what the constitution says will at best get you a beating at worst sent to a re-educated camp

The time to fight is before that, and sadly I think we are fast approaching the point of no return, last year I would have said you were wrong suggesting we are headed towards a revolution but today I don’t see how we can avoid one

To many in my family have shed blood in defense of this county for me to watch it torn down by those that hate it, and I known a many that feel the same

I just really hope things change before that point comes, because the US revolutionary war is the only revolution where the people ended up better then before it happened, largely because we had strong highly principled men leading it, and those are few and far between nowadays

This is what happens when public schools have poor real life education and government approved indoctrination. What we see today is the result of decades of it. We're done. It's just a matter of when.

Biden is a complete p.o.s, along with everyone else of his ilk.

Agreed. Most of these mindless/meaningless leftist slogans originate from the lips of leftist college professors.

The amendments are rigidly absolute, and it's written into the amendments.
1. Congress shall make NO law.....not congress shall make some laws
2. Shall NOT be infringed....not shall be infringed if some politician thinks it's a good idea
4. Shall NOT be violated....not can be violated if some cop can push his weight around

On and on. The founders were very specific about what they wrote, they didn't just willy billy write stuff down and hope people would get the idea. If they wanted congress to have the power to .ale any law restricting speech, or to make laws infringing on the right to keep and bear arms (to use two easy examples), they would have layed that out, and not said "no law" and "shall not be infringed"

Lots of things to be concerned about and to me the fact that my vote and my states electoral votes were not kept sacred is at the top of my list.

But then a lawyer said there was no widespread election fraud so I guess everything is hunky dory now.


When are they gonna open a season on them things anyway?

Also, if a court refuses to hear a case, be it about the way other states conducted their election of a 2nd amendment case; then what good is any amendment?

Riddle me that one plz

Some people need to stop being naive. Nothing is absolute except this . . . and that's even incorrect without the "e" :-)

Can always go the Andrew Jackson route.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

So the amendment is not saying a state is required to, or has a right to, keep a well regulated militia. It's saying that because a well regulated militia (army) is necessary to keep a free state secure, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

So the whole point of the amendment is to say the people have a right to keep and bear arms.

The word "regulated" is not meant technically in the modern, contemporary use of the word. Regulated in the context of the amendment means a potent, well-maintained, sufficiently powerful to protect the state.

Then let's get on with it. I don't want to leave the problem to my kids.

IDK how you could actually rule it out at this point. I wish guys like Jay Secula (sp?) Or Mark Levin would run for office and parade the constitution out in front of these traitors and half witts like my senator Ted Cruz does.

I think they are taking small steps at first to gauge the response from the people. If nothing happens or it quickly blows over more will come.

They have to pack the US Supreme Court first. After that anything can happen.

Garryowen

I hate to admit it but I'm itching for it. I've seen this coming for the better part of forty years and it looks like the time is getting ripe. Like you, I have kids and grandkids and I'm not turning them over to leftists if I have any say in the matter.

I agree. It seems to me Biden made a pretty tepid step with what he suggested. A trial balloon. The left is taking very calculated steps to insure we have no means to stop their advance. We're spectators to our own country's suicide.

You're not wrong.

I disagree.

Made this exact point to my brother yesterday. What we are seeing are test runs.....by our government, the chinese, the russians. All to gage our level of tolerance and compliance and to see the economic and social impact of each new run.

They understand and fear the following and is the main reason they want to take away gun rights. I have seen a civil war and it's something we want to avoid at all cost. There is nothing China would like more. I am sure they have a hand in this division.

In what way?

Garry They are taking steps as you suggest. We can only hope more folks see behind the curtains of their doings. Also, my feelings are the national debt is a ploy to run us into the ground and make us more dependent on the government for all things. They've started with the military to weed out those that swore the oath to the constitution but is my understanding that most are on to them and will not turn on their brothers and sisters. A few happenings in the Coast Guard/Home land defense have occurred that has made we smile and given me hope too. Won't get into that for good reasons.... I knew it was going to be bad but holy cow.......

I've often thought the Founders believed that citizens should be able to carry the same arms as their military counterparts. By their use of regulated, I wonder if the Founders believed that training should be involved with such military type firearms?

Technically, Biden's right: the Bill of Rights generally isn't absolute. This is true of the First Amendment--you can't shout "fire!" in a crowded theatre.

And it's just as true of the Second. You don't have the right to all the weapons of our modern military without regulation.

As for the fantasy that a bunch of keyboard warriors will really take up arms, I won't be joining in.

Jim

I respectfully find your points very weak in substance in light of the agenda that is being brought forward presently

True colors! You do have the right to those arms, It just has been suspended by the NFA.

The NFA was enacted decades ago, and no one's taken up arms yet.

Jim

James got a selfie stick for Christmas it seems

I tend to agree to a point.

The most often quoted phrase is " shall not be infringed ".
Another phrase not mentioned, or a single word I should say is " regulated". This has always confused me when reading the entire second.

"A well regulated militia". What did they mean by regulated??

Don't know what he said, but the snowflake's back. Does he seem sober this time?

Jim

James I would be pleased to hear you explain the meaning, intent and purpose of the 2nd amendment particular the right of a well regulated militia based on the Founders purpose for it. It seems to me the purpose for its existence is being full realized before our eyes.Their foresight only seems to strength the need and importance of it in today's political atmosphere.

Aha! You'e hit on why those are wrong who say the Second Amendment is absolute and unequivocal.

The Second Amendment wasn't handed down by God on a stone tablet. Its language is a compromise, a deal hammered out in back rooms between those who wanted the individual right to bear arms versus those who feared the Mob of common folk being armed. It was sausage being made.

Jim

No President is Absolute.

Yes sir, you're asking for a long lecture, a real dissertation. Why don't you ask a specific question, and we'll run it up the flagpole and talk about it.

Jim

Actually, you CAN shout fire in a crowded theater.................if there is a fire.

Holmes' statement......which was not a legal ruling but an analogy.......is almost ALWAYS misquoted.

He actually referred to.................... "falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic"...."

Okay. So go down to the federal courthouse and shout, "Bomb!" and see what happens.

Jim

What IS absolute is the fact you voted for this mess, knowing (This word is unacceptable on Trapperman) well what was going to happen.

You prove my point...and that of Justice Holmes. Speech that is dangerous and TRUE is protected by the first amendment. Speech that is dangerous and FALSE is not

I did ask for an explanation of a specific topic but can understand that the topic may be to broad for the explanation in the setting we are in. I too am limited on time here also so if I don't respond adequately my apologies.
I believe the intent of the afor mentioned amendment had one general purpose in the intentions of the founders and that general purpose was to give the person or people the ability to defend their constitutional rights against any governmental infringement, both domestic or foreign, as a last resort back stop. What is your perceived general understanding of the intent or purpose of this right as written by the creators?

Yes sir: I agree with your interpretation of the Second A.

But it doesn't say so clearly. It results from sausage being made.

Jim

In Biden’s terminology, at which point does the word absolute end. Does it mean banning certain firearms or does it mean the government can smash down doors to confiscate AR 15 type firearms that are deemed unfit for any citizen to own. Anybody can play with a word.

Pretty sure nobody is surprised you won't be joining in.

After you, Kilroy.

Jim

No sir, training is not a requirement and would be a major problem. Some people would not be able to afford training and the liberals would use training requirements to take away our rights. Gun safety is a personal responsibility.



I've often thought the Founders believed that citizens should be able to carry the same arms as their military counterparts. By their use of regulated, I wonder if the Founders believed that training should be involved with such military type firearms?[/quote]

Yes I know 100% chance you won't be before me.

I wasn't insinuating it wasn't absolute, it is for our country, its what made our country. I agree our second amendment rights were not God given, its been documented our founders copied that from from the British (English) constitution. (which their people allowed them to trample)

I'm just wondering what they meant by a "regulated militia"?

it is very humbling to know that the founders were mostly wealthier people....they signed the paper (DOI) and were subject to execution if caught.

My God given rights are not subject to being taken away because some people sign a piece of paper. Make no mistake about it, if they are able to disarm the conservatives of this country we will be purged and punished...Stand Tall, Fellas!

This ain't up for debate.

Okay, James. Please point out where I am going wrong with this specific statement?

"A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." So the amendment is not saying a state is required to, or has a right to, keep a well-regulated militia. It's saying that because a well-regulated militia (army) is necessary to keep a free state secure, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. So the whole point of the amendment is to say the people have a right to keep and bear arms. The word "regulated" is not meant technically in the modern, contemporary use of the word. Regulated in the context of the amendment means a potent, well-maintained, sufficiently powerful to protect the state.



Yes sir, you're asking for a long lecture, a real dissertation. Why don't you ask a specific question, and we'll run it up the flagpole and talk about it.

Jim
[/quote]

I'm reasonably fat and happy. Content with my life.

I feel no compelling reason to put my and my family's lives at risk by doing something stupid, like what happened on January 6.

I'm not going to war over my right to own an AR. I may hide mine or otherwise dispose of it, but I ain't taking up arms over it.

I'll work within our established political system--Congress, the courts, and local officials--to try to preserve our rights.

Jim

I bet your fat.

James, you've already demonstrated you don't care about your 2A rights. I know you said you didn't think creepy joe was serious, but I know you're not that stupid.

stupid is as stupid does......

[/quote]


I've read my share of early history, and from what I've read most early militias were armed by their town or state.. As in, they didn't keep their own weapons personally.

I believe based on letters written by the framers on the laws of this country, others documents written in that Era, laws passed by those people and early judicial interpretation that it it very clear what the intention was even if the actual wording of the Constitution may leave room for other meanings. With that in mind any effort to lessen, change, deviate or restrict that right(knowingly or unknowingly) to any law abiding free citizen of this country is an act of treason against this nation and its people. And I fully believe the powers in control are knowingly undermining the intent of the law.

According to Justice Scalia, the phrase "well regulated" meant 'disciplined', at the time of the writing, and that possession of firearms..or ARMS had no relationship to whether a person was part of any militia group

yup. Stand Tall.

Jtg, I haven't read the Heller decision in a while, but I believe you're tracking that result. I agree with you and the Court in that decision.

Jim

My God given right to defend myself from evil is not dependent on some people in black robes interpretation of it....those God given rights were not given to me by the constitution, God gave them to me.

Thanks Ken, I've often wondered about that word being inserted and hadn't heard anyone's interpitation of it before.

You guys need to make up your minds: am I stupid, or clever?

Jim

Educated, but if I say more you might be offended.

Well, James. I am in complete agreement to work within our established political system. Trying to stack the Supreme Court, is not working within our established political system. Messing around with 2nd, does nothing more than divide us and take power away from the people. As far as to hide or dispose guns, my question would be from whom? And why should we give away power to Congress, who have proven they can not be trusted.

You have went from discussing the legal intent of the 2nd to stating your personal actions if those rights are terminated I believe because further discussions will lead to your past points and actions supporting current movements as being wrong. When the freedoms we have lived under are gone I hope your around for your grand children to ask why the people allowed those freedoms to be taken away. The ignorance of mankind will prevail as with every other great society in history. We think we are so intelligent and in that lies our ignorance. Without a higher moral code given from a higher being than ourselves we will continue to choke on our own arrogance, greed, laziness and pride.
I will agree that the above political options must be exhausted before arms are taken but we are nearing that point and as the intent of the 2nd stipulates we should be prepared.

Intelligent but misguided is my take based what I've seen. Motivated by unfavorable events in your life. But mostly speculation on my part without knowing you better.

[/quote]

You guys need to make up your minds: am I stupid, or clever?

Jim
[/quote]
I would say drunk .

Egotistical even.

start with the politicians -- probably won't have to go much farther than that.

#1 enemy is the fake news, social media companies, google(brezos) and similar things......those are how the politicians get away with what they are doing.

Pro sports is in there also....but some of you folks like to watch that so....

Ill not go looking for trouble. If trouble comes to me then the thinking changes. Just watching and learning. Family does come first for me but i have a problem with the outlook on the future for my family....

Well if ya haven't figured that out yet , you should hand over your arms to uncle Joe and join the flock of his sheeple

Anyone that is infringing or enabling infringement on my constitutional rights.

I have a question . I keep hearing my GOD given rights a lot , please show me where I can find a list of these rights. They aren't in the bible. It gives you the choice to have salvation but I don't see these rights some of you keep quoting.

Could not agree more. I would just add China who funds many of those you stated below.

God is used by believers because that is where they are born from. A nonbeliever still believes they are born with a right to defend themselves by whatever means necessary.

Maybe the God given right is the fact that he gave us a soul to make the right decisions for all his creations. He's been a part of America since day one. I would hate to think he would want us to sit back and watch everything we stand for be thrown to the way side. Yes, his creation of man has had its ups and downs but in the long run we learned to always have him on our side. Never Forsake Us Oh Lord.

I didn't say you weren't stupid. I said you weren't THAT stupid.

I know its in the "Old" but what does Ex 22 mean when it says "2 “If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; 3 but if it happens after sunrise, the defender is guilty of bloodshed."

I don't understand what Hobbie means by God is used by believers and non-believers just defend themselves by any means but I suspect there is a trace of "whatever will be, will be " in there some where. That makes as much sense as saying Jesus made grape juice instead of real wine because God would never enable people to hurt others, but without dynamite how would this land ever have been cleared for farming?

Have not read all these replies, however my simple minded conclusion of the argument is that the constitution was based for the continuous life of this country as written and not to be infringed upon with more change to it's basic script.

Adding more to it as more amendments is a court thing, which should be closely watched, as in stacking the court, which is obviously why the Democrats wish to add more members now, due to them continually losing in this area of our country's workings.

This written document say's what it needs and does not in my view say anything else, whether one looks at it today in our vernacular or whether you see it for what it is meant for the life of the country, which is what it should be looked for, not for use as a new invented, reverified, newly discovered meaning something for just a certain few who can't seem to get over the fact that those who wrote it were obviously looking forward in our country's future use of it !

That is not why he gave you a soul.

Self-defense is a natural reflex.......yet some holier-than-thou's think they can call you a criminal after the fact for defending yourself. That's why society is in the mess it's in. Humans are doing things to their own that the most vicious of wild animals don't do....yet we are the dominant species on earth. Pretty scary. Scarier than a ghost gun.

You are correct.

They are Natural Rights. Human rights. They come with you at birth.....like a warranty.

The earliest discussions of natural law and natural rights were among the ancient Greeks about 1500 BC.

You can find them alluded to, obliquely, in Romans 2, 14&15

You can also find them alluded to in the Declaration of Independence, which specifically cites Natural Law and Nature's God.

"........certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". These are all natural rights. Not created by man.

I find it interesting that it specifies the right to life.........which therefore must have a corollary that represents the human right to self defense. How else to secure the unalienable right to life ??

Seems to me this is integral to the 2nd amendment and arguments over what it permits and doesn't permit

Would we be having this discussion if our founders had thought the same way!

I say there are only 2 kinds of rights.................those that you hold and protect by force. Those you are willingly granted by your neighbors.

This simplified list of human rights, for example, is from a United Nations document created in 1948, “A Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” If you are looking for God-given rights, representatives from around the world agreed that these are the birthright of every human being. The complete version of this document can be downloaded for free from the internet.

We Are All Born Free & Equal.We all have our own thoughts and ideas, our own goals and values. We should all be treated in the same way. No exceptions.
Don’t Discriminate.These rights belong to everybody, whatever our differences, no exceptions. We cannot give them to some and take them away from others, or give some to one person and others to someone else.
The Right to Life.We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety. We should work to keep others from being abandoned or forgotten by society, so that all people can live their lives. Childhood needs to be protected by all adults for all children.
No Slavery.Nobody has any right to make us a slave. We cannot make anyone our slave.
No Torture. Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us.
You Have Rights No Matter Where You Go.These rights travel with you, from home to work to school, in private and public, from state to state, from country to country.
We’re All Equal Before the Law. The law is the same for everyone. It must treat us all fairly. The laws apply to everyone equally, no exceptions.
Your Human Rights Are Protected by Law.We can all ask for the law to help us when we are not treated fairly.
No Unfair Detainment.Nobody has the right to put us in prison without good reason and keep us there, or to send us away from our country.
The Right to Trial.If we are put on trial, this should be in public. The people who try us should not let anyone tell them what to do.
We’re Always Innocent Until Proven Guilty.Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is proven. When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to show it is not true.
The Right to Privacy.Nobody should try to harm our good name. Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters, or bother us or our family without a good reason.
Freedom to Move. We all have the right to go where we want in our own country and to travel as we wish.
The Right to Seek a Safe Place to Live.If we are frightened of being badly treated in our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be safe.
Right to a Nationality.We all have the right to belong to a country, even if we had to flee our country of origin.
Marriage and Family. Every grown-up has the right to marry and have a family if they want to. Men and women have the same rights when they are married, and when they are separated.
The Right to Your Own Things. Everyone has the right to own things or share them. Nobody should take our things from us without a good reason.
Freedom of Thought. We all have the right to believe in what we want to believe, to have a religion, or to change it if we want.
Freedom of Expression. We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share our ideas with other people.
The Right to Public Assembly. We all have the right to meet our friends and to work together in peace to defend our rights. Nobody can make us join a group if we don’t want to.
The Right to Democracy. We all have the right to take part in the government of our country. Every grown-up should be allowed to choose their own leaders.
Social Security. We all have the right to affordable housing, medicine, education, and childcare, enough money to live on and medical help if we are ill or old.
Workers’ Rights. Every grown-up has the right to do a job, to receive a fair wage for their work, and to join a trade union.
The Right to Play. We all have the right to rest from work and to relax.
Food and Shelter for All. We all have the right to a good life. Mothers and children, people who are old, unemployed or disabled, and all people have the right to be cared for.
The Right to Education. Education is a right. Primary school should be free. We should learn about the United Nations and how to get along with others.
Copyright. Copyright is a special law that protects one’s own artistic creations and writings; others cannot make copies without permission. We all have the right to our own way of life and to enjoy the good things that art, science and learning bring.
A Fair and Free World. There must be proper order so we can all enjoy rights and freedoms in our own country and all over the world.
Responsibility. We have a duty to other people, and we should protect their rights and freedoms.
No One Can Take Away Your Human Rights.

Do not believe in God?
That's OK, you still have been born with certain and unalienable rights....just like the man who does not believe in the sun is still warmed by its rays....just like the man who realizes that the sun is there.

You are an autonomous and sovereign human being. We tend to forget that.

Sovereign Citizen they call themselves.

No....

We can hammer our swords into plow shares, and hammer our plow shares back into swords....That may not be a "right", but it is right....

Forget it Ken, he will ignore yours or anyone's point when he's wrong.

If James wanted to compare apples to apples the SC should have erased "bomb" or "fire" from the dictionary

It's the intent that's been banned no inanimate words. Guns are inanimate objects until someone uses them for a nefarious purpose

It will have to get worse before it gets better

Marty, your list of rights is and was written by man. My question was where is this list of GOD given rights everyone keeps quoting?

Go forth and multiply is one for starters. We seem to be doing a bang-up job of that!

I know what you're driving at. God places more emphasis on responsibilities than rights. You are correct.

Seems maybe the elect are more driven by grandeur and search for a crown more than led by duty ?

I think a big part of it is many believers find there is an inseparable link between Christianity and the founding of this country. They're reluctant to let it go. I understand that thinking.

You're a liar, Steven. Any longtime board member such as yourself knows better, has seen me concede a point or a bet before.

Just because I can't find time to return to a debate before the thread is deleted or pages deep, doesn't mean I'm ducking an argument.

Ken, you're right it was a poor analogy. But it doesn't turn on truth or falsity.

Otherwise, what should we do about those who falsely claim the election was stolen?

That allegation has already caused one death, as well as untold damage to our electoral system and form of government.

What about THAT crowded theatre?

Jim

Back to the Second Amendment, even Scalia, in the Heller majority opinion, didn't say the Second Amendment is absolute.

Jim

\


I am not a liar James, you constantly duck. You managed to post several times after Ken made his point that I quoted. I realize you are bombarded and I realize it isn't generally respectful but it is what it is.


Tell Scalia to come get them(I know, I know)

Donna and I had the pleasure of attending the induction ceremonies this weekend for the 6th President of Dallas Theological Seminary with congratulatory congregations coming to Dallas from all over the world to congratulate the new President (who grew up working on a ranch in Texas!). DTS is one of but a handful of traditional seminaries still standing strong in America. 2 Tim 4:2 remains the motto as it was in 1924.

A theme of the keynote speaker last night was chilling and candid.... America is now a pagan nation, as the religion of Christianity has been marginalized by the culture and culture won. Helping culture win were liberal seminaries and the students of those institutions who filled liberal church pulpits across our land >>>>> agreeing to the cultural values and also building churches for causes rather than for the bridegroom, Jesus.

The speakers of the evening all agreed; We see the fruits of our pagan nation all around us. Immorality has won. Pornography is now bigger than church in our land. You can cuss in front of children anywhere you want now-a-days and it's fun and alright but darkness hates the Light, so be careful using the word "God" around anyone now-a-days. Perversions will continue to conquer without divine assistance, and there is no doubt that what is happening will effect America for centuries to come. Fighting one another got us here, so fighting one another won't get us out of anything either.

May God have mercy on us as we acknowledge that God does miracles in and amidst impossible odds!
The amazing news is that 50,000 believers are coming to faith each day across the globe. There is a need for 400 trained pastors every day!
It's just not here in the land of America.

Blessings,
Mark

It’s sad the POTUS today can’t even quote the Constitution most days, you know that thing!

Come on, man!

I am sad to say our President of the United States of America is a JERK. I have NEVER said that about any other President.

Pathetic con artist .... would fit Joe job description way better than the title they cheated him into.

Steven, I "duck" arguments:

- (as you note) when I'm bombarded.

- when I can no longer find the thread when I return to the board.

- when I feel the argument has played out, and we would only be repeating ourselves if we continue.

- when the other guy has made a point I consider obviously correct.

I thought Ken's point, that it's okay to shout "fire" when there is an actual fire, was an obvious point.

If anyone feels I've ducked or slighted them, shoot me a PM or something.

Jim

People should actually research the history of the writing of the Constitution. The one we have is the FINAL draft after much compromising and placing of weasel words.

Was that his point?

Read Federalist No. 1 and tell me they didn't see these people coming.

I’m VERY pro 1st, 2nd amendment and almost all of them actually. But they are not absolute, amendments are amendments to the constitution, so you can amend an amendment as it is part of the constitution. Look at the 18 th amendment banning the distribution of liquor but the 21st made that amendment null. I wouldn’t complain if they amended the 16th amendment (income tax). In order to amend the constitution you need a 2/3rds vote in the house and senate, or with a constitutional conventions called by 2/3 state legislators. After that 3/4 of the states must pass it.

Good God, I hope your law degree was free. This is some serious apples to oranges horse---- and you know it.

Because someone yelled 'Fire' in a crowded theater once we didn't ban open speech in public... We didn't set laws limiting how many words a minute someone is allowed to say... We didn't make it a crime to speak above a whisper. We don't require people to pass a background check before they can make a speech, or enter a theater.

We jail/hold accountable those who "abuse" their freedom of speech.

And anyone who has ever heard the word "law" should be knowledgeable about how the US v Miller decision was reached... And how it's the sorriest joke of a decision ever. But hey, the SCOTUS is never wrong, right? Dred Scott was a benchmark of legal expertise on human rights too. Or the decision on the constitutionality of internment of Japanese-Americans during WW2.

Biden doesn't have the wherewithal to be trusted to shovel manure from one spot to another but somehow he knows which amendments are absolute and which ones aren't... Guess slavery and women's suffrage are up for discussion as well.

Mike

Yup, you have the right to free speech but not the right to slander

I have a question. How many of the "lawyers" on here are BAR CERTIFIED as ATTORNEYS in their State? . . . just asking . . .

I didn't realize attorneys were the only ones certified to read things written in plain English. In fact, based on all the legal documents I've ever read... They aren't.

Mike

That's going to leave a mark. Ouch!

No such thing as "plain English" in Law. It's always subjective and how it is comprehensively understood by the reader, or Courts.

"...the right of the people to KEEP and bear ARMS shall not be infringed." is plain English.

Now if you want to discuss the militia portion, let's do that too.

Mike

Well Mike, your answer is not relevant to my initial question, and see my previous post above.

How is not relevant? I'm not an attorney. And I don't have to be to understand what is written in the 2A. It's pretty plain.

Unless we're going to do the slick Willie, "depends on what the definition of 'is' is..." game.

Mike

Mike, your expertise is so glaringly obvious that you should go read the Heller decision and tell us what it means.

Jim

The constitution wasn't written for lawyers. Lawyers like to muddy things up though. This gun control thing started the same way it is being promoted today. Fear.

The National Firearms Act didn't start a war because people were afraid of gangsters. The depression created Bonnie and Clyde, Machine gun Kelly etc. Prohibition created Al Capone, Meyer Lansky etc. Today its gangsters who are the result of prohibition for other recreational drugs.

Fear is used to justify making guns illegal. The NFA didnt stop armed robbery. (the end of the depression slowed it way down and stopped most of the hatred for bankers)
Prohibition against Heroin and Cocaine isnt working any better than ethanol prohibition did and it creates the same violent organized gangs.

It was under Reagans presidency that funding was curtailed for mental hospitals. Forty years ago they were small self sufficient community's. Raising ag products, building furniture and other things. Today the mentally ill are left to their own devices. Walking around our cities, homeless and in rags, talking to their voices.

This lack of mental health care is the reason for most of the mass shooting's. People don't choose mental illness. We can reward the irresponsible behavior of promiscuous young people with more welfare but we can't put the mentally ill back in hospitals.

passing more gun laws is easier than working on real solutions

We are in a sad state of affairs.

The Mentality ill are running the country as political heads
Or. They become Lawyers

The scribes of our day are deciding what is good in their sight.
That tends to favor the scribes (lawyers).
Our founding father scribes (of America) were disciples of John Locke philosophy called Lockean or none of us would be typing on this here puter the way we are.
I have no idea what current day scribes follow. I know who but not what.
Does anyone?

I wish there were more Lockeans today in the ranks of America's scribes but sadly they have been subdued.
Realizing that wishes only come true in Disney stories - like Cinderella - where the prince and princess live "happily ever after."
This ain't a Disney land.

Jefferson quoted this book in our Constitution;



Blessings,
Mark

Gone I read all of that too. A lot of different feelings have been shared, now the talk has turned is the high court to help the left with their over all plan to destabilize us with more Judges, slow but sure they are on the move against those that seek to keep our freedoms and beliefs... Look at how things have changed since 08, heck, it goes back to 9/11. Those rag heads danced in the desert when Obama won the election..... Same thing happened in China and Iran last Nov. I do think about what would of happened if China hadn't turned loose the sickness on the world........ Am glad I'm still upright to try and protect my family.....

In plain english: I am on here to promote the general welfare. To be clear, not the specific welfare, but the general welfare. General, meaning anything a lawyer wants it to mean.

promote: to help or encourage to exist or flourish; further:
to promote world peace.

Ray describes where we are and where we are going in chapter 8 and 9. James, I would be interested to know your thoughts on the following link:

https://www.principles.com/the-changing-world-order/#chapter8

First shouldn't we determine whether the claim is true or false ?

The founding fathers were as varied in their beliefs as the people on this forum. Not all of the same mind or beliefs.

Release the kraken

Very true, and YES!

James, if you're a lawyer as you say
Then you know full well you can yell FIRE in a crowded movie hall
It's not against the law at all.
Check the SCOTUS ruling on the matter.
Try again, your trolling is getting weak

All the overwhelming evidence in proof won't surpass the desperate need to "save face" , the need to argue despite the facts.

This statement would be true of anyone or any group in human history. Is there a take-a-way?

Is the right to keep and bear arms an individual or collective right?

If you say a collective right then you have to admit that the framers just up and decided to include a collective right amidst a big long list of individual rights... Seems legit.

Breyer's dissent is a stretch as well... There are thousands of examples of rifles, smoothbore fowlers/muskets, and pistols that were held privately in homes... not stored in militia lockers awaiting the time when they were needed. The requirements for serving in the "well regulated" militia are pretty mild... Be of appropriate age and physical constitution, OWN an appropriate rifle/smoothbore and keep enough powder/shot on hand to outfit that weapon for a predetermined number of shots... And I have yet to find a requirement for the weapons of militia members to be capable of accepting a bayonet. That standard alone would differentiate a civilian firearm from a "weapon of war" in that day and age.

As far as the 2A not covering weapons of war... What else are you going to outfit a militia with?

On a somewhat related note... History seems to repeat itself. George III was mentally deficient as well. He should've been locked up, not propped up on a throne. Sound familiar?

Mike

FEDERALIST NO. 2

It has often given me pleasure to observe that independent America was not composed of detached and distant territories, but that one connected, fertile, widespreading country was the portion of our western sons of liberty. Providence has in a particular manner blessed it with a variety of soils and productions, and watered it with innumerable streams, for the delight and accommodation of its inhabitants. A succession of navigable waters forms a kind of chain round its borders, as if to bind it together; while the most noble rivers in the world, running at convenient distances, present them with highways for the easy communication of friendly aids, and the mutual transportation and exchange of their various commodities.

With equal pleasure I have as often taken notice that Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people--a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs, and who, by their joint counsels, arms, and efforts, fighting side by side throughout a long and bloody war, have nobly established general liberty and independence.

This convention composed of men who possessed the confidence of the people, and many of whom had become highly distinguished by their patriotism, virtue and wisdom, in times which tried the minds and hearts of men, undertook the arduous task. In the mild season of peace, with minds unoccupied by other subjects, they passed many months in cool, uninterrupted, and daily consultation; and finally, without having been awed by power, or influenced by any passions except love for their country, they presented and recommended to the people the plan produced by their joint and very unanimous councils.

Good post Posco.

Anyone who has written literary works knows that the author always starts the work with the key premise you want people to know;

It has often given me pleasure to observe that independent America was not composed of detached and distant territories

And you end the literary piece the same way.... your key summary you want readers to know;

the plan produced by their joint and very unanimous councils

Being a writer myself, the Federalist is a pleasure to read.

Blessings,
Mark

My thinking on the wording of the 2nd has always been that the way its worded the writers clearly wanted the right to bear arms for the individual . This is evident by the placing of the comma after the part about militias in the final draft ratified by congress, then they use the phrase " the right of the people" the only time they used the word people they specifically meant the individual citizen.

Thanks, Mark.

I'm of a suspicion most of us know little about the documents we refer or allude to, our constitution being one of them. Many of us have a passing acquaintance with some portions of our important historical documents but they tend to be superficial and narrow in scope. I've had copies of our constitution, the Federalist Papers, Thomas Paine's Common Sense, Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, Shakespeare's complete works and the Bible for years and I've made an effort to benefit from them. Other than the manual for my tractor, I've never felt the need to read much else.

I'd argue, we'd be a much different people group, us Americans, if more people took your literary approach.
Those days are in the rear view mirror so we work with what... "we got." Literally.

Blessings,
Mark

The take away is some people on here act like they were the apostle's and were all followers of some divine light. When in reality they were just like the people on here. They did the best they could and made blunders like everyone.

I disagree. Providence brought that group of men together to craft one of the finest documents ever written by man.

Using that logic you would have to say providence put Biden in the white house? If not who?

As a judgement, yes.

I am an apostle of my divine rights.....that's for sure.

I was just asking an internet Q rex. You submitted a statement that is subjective, only has "sure" as an afterthought, and I was just wondering what you meant?
No one on this site, or another other has looked into the eyes of our Lord, so no Apostles here. Peter, Paul, John and the other Apostles did take the commissioned Gospel message to Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria, and all the nations beyond any human ability... as we speak of Apostles today and they've been dust for almost 2,000 years. No legacy like it and I, perhaps like Posco, am inclined to ponder divine providence in the crafting of this nation. How else did a bunch of colonials defeat the greatest nation on earth?

Funny thing how all the great nations in world history do tumble. All of 'em. Dollar to a donut says nobody in them thought they would.

Blessings,
Mark

I don't understand your post I used sure where in my post? Also I was referring to the way some people on here seem to regard the founding fathers.

Read something written by Nancy Pelosi and then read something written by John Jay.

Posco, that ^^^^ post was quite good.
Some may not grasp the analogy however. Reading comprehension hasn't been in vogue for quite some time now

That''s a long article. What point or part are you interested in?

Jim

So far I've been arguing the Bill of Rights are not absolute. Beyond finding an individual Second Amendment right, the Supreme Court in the Heller case applied strict scrutiny versus rational basis analysis to strike down a Washington DC ban on handguns.

If circumstances had been different, the Court might have upheld the same law. If the DC law had only banned firearms within courthouses and other public buildings, I suspect the Court would have upheld the law.

So far I've only argued that the first ten amendments to the Constitution are not absolute. Biden's right in that statement.

But the amendments have always been broadly construed in accordance with their purpose. That includes the Second Amendment, in my view.

What I'm saying is that the Second Amendment should be construed broadly in favor of its purpose, to protect the right to keep and bear arms.

Jim

Some how John Jay and Nancy Pelosi are in this . Okay when it was first written he didn't support the constitution not until later and she is just sad. But if you want to compare what modern statesmen does compare to him?

The first has already been infringed upon if your a conservative and want to talk about conservatism....if you want to talk about blm you can talk all you want to talk...if they start to confiscate firearms you can bet the conservatives will be the first people they visit..all that is about limiting the oppositions ability to fight back....either thru speech or any other means, it is already being done.

These people want to keep the power forever......and they just may be able to do that unless there is a violent upheaval.

Can you think of one? That's the point.

They may be able to confiscate guns and ammo in the cities. In rural areas, that idea is going to go down like a lead ballon end they will loose a lot of the folks trying to do the confiscating

James, Since you’re a smart guy, I was hoping that you would read the article and see there is a very good chance of us heading into a civil war and it’s helpful to bring people together. If you have different views, that’s great and we all should be open to those views. If you are stating your views to divide, I feel that is the wrong thing to do and it’s an unfair advantage, if your attorney to do so.
We like our guns, family and God. We see, mostly east and west coast liberals, taking away our way of life, so of course and rightly so, messing with the second amendment is an inflammatory subject.
Each year there is less and less of us, so I would prefer to tribe build, so we can be stronger together.

Near as I could tell during the pandemic pandemonium early on there was no difference between urban and rural hoarding of essentials.