"Congress shall make no law..." restricts the STATES? How, exactly?
Joel Send a noteboard - 28/12/2012 03:03:19 PM
Just because someone once made a legal argument that it did not (that a court eventually ruled against) does not mean that it was not binding until the court ruled.
The Constitution says that what is not expressly given to the federal government resides with the states and the people. HOWEVER, the Constitution also specifically states certain RIGHTS that are reserved to the people; the states can not act against those rights (including gun ownership).
I understand you don't like the concept of unrestricted gun ownership. I get it. You think there should be some "common sense" (gosh what a slippery term) regulations. OK, CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW IT. Don't ignore it. The document is too damn important. It IS more important than 26 people in Connecticut, it is about protecting EVERYONE, and the folk it is protecting us from is our own government (and inherent human foolishness).
The Constitution says that what is not expressly given to the federal government resides with the states and the people. HOWEVER, the Constitution also specifically states certain RIGHTS that are reserved to the people; the states can not act against those rights (including gun ownership).
I understand you don't like the concept of unrestricted gun ownership. I get it. You think there should be some "common sense" (gosh what a slippery term) regulations. OK, CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION TO ALLOW IT. Don't ignore it. The document is too damn important. It IS more important than 26 people in Connecticut, it is about protecting EVERYONE, and the folk it is protecting us from is our own government (and inherent human foolishness).
It is not a matter of interpretation, but of what the plain text of the document says; it affirms regulations AS regulations. Strict constructionists can not argue otherwise, so which of your principles are you rejecting as personally inconvenient?
Honorbound and honored to be Bonded to Mahtaliel Sedai
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
Last First in wotmania Chat
Slightly better than chocolate.
Love still can't be coerced.
Please Don't Eat the Newbies!
LoL. Be well, RAFOlk.
When guns are a big national issue, how do reporters & pundits not know facts about them?
- 21/12/2012 05:33:14 PM
1538 Views
You don't hunt by walking into a classroom and shooting 20 deer
- 21/12/2012 05:56:16 PM
991 Views
You're actually not right on that one
- 21/12/2012 07:49:53 PM
919 Views
That wasn't the point I was making
- 21/12/2012 09:49:40 PM
865 Views
You should probably clarify it then
- 21/12/2012 10:47:26 PM
1021 Views
His post was perfectly clear. Yours seemed like a response to an entirely different post.
- 21/12/2012 10:53:39 PM
1177 Views
Explain that remark, it is not obvious to me *NM*
- 21/12/2012 11:00:10 PM
529 Views
I think
- 21/12/2012 11:13:34 PM
851 Views
Thats' easy, there is simply no such thing as a 'hunting rifle'
- 21/12/2012 11:17:41 PM
860 Views
I'd say the expert gunsmith
- 21/12/2012 11:28:02 PM
906 Views
I'm also an expert at math and physics, should I be more forgiving about those too?
- 22/12/2012 12:38:45 AM
848 Views
Re: I'm also an expert at math and physics, should I be more forgiving about those too?
- 22/12/2012 01:00:18 AM
875 Views
Well I appreciate your calling it pedantic when you aren't an expert, thanks for correcting me
- 22/12/2012 01:15:08 AM
933 Views
Re: Well I appreciate your calling it pedantic when you aren't an expert, thanks for correcting me
- 22/12/2012 09:35:38 AM
1066 Views
I thought I was being perfectly clear.
- 21/12/2012 10:57:35 PM
870 Views
A bit of an aside, but I was reading that the gun used in the attack can be bought in Canada too.
- 21/12/2012 06:14:01 PM
875 Views
you're largely correct, which is why we need stronger laws on ownership not guns per se
- 21/12/2012 09:39:14 PM
831 Views
I can't think of a better reason than self defense
- 21/12/2012 10:33:26 PM
889 Views
He is right about Australia
- 21/12/2012 10:46:27 PM
868 Views
No kidding 
- 21/12/2012 10:59:28 PM
855 Views
- 21/12/2012 10:59:28 PM
855 Views
If you knew all that
- 21/12/2012 11:02:38 PM
879 Views
Because I used wiki of course
- 21/12/2012 11:21:25 PM
927 Views
He said ""self defense" is not a valid excuse to own a lethal weapon"
- 21/12/2012 11:34:59 PM
801 Views
Yes,which is un-cited, but I did prove it's a valid excuse to use one, so...
- 22/12/2012 12:36:19 AM
928 Views
The difference between allowing someone to defend themselves with a gun they have
- 22/12/2012 01:09:40 AM
843 Views
Which you apparently think they shouldn't be able to obtain? Catch-22 comes to mind.
- 22/12/2012 01:17:25 AM
888 Views
Re: Which you apparently think they shouldn't be able to obtain? Catch-22 comes to mind.
- 22/12/2012 09:51:51 AM
907 Views
A wood chipper isn't a gun, and evidence without proof isn't evidence
- 22/12/2012 06:10:34 PM
854 Views
If only you'd asked him for a citation rather than just saying you thought he was wrong eh? *NM*
- 23/12/2012 12:29:30 AM
638 Views
I think you are on the right track, but to the wrong destination; "lethal weapon" is redundant.
- 21/12/2012 11:05:29 PM
862 Views
My read is that the 2nd Amendment not only allows, but mandates, cop-killer bullets.
- 22/12/2012 12:45:04 AM
902 Views
Does the Second Amendment protect the rights of felons and the mentally incompetent to have guns?
- 22/12/2012 02:35:16 AM
1067 Views
Court rulings have determined that your Constitutional Rights can be restricted for felony/insanity *NM*
- 23/12/2012 12:59:31 PM
558 Views
Activist judges should not make law. 
- 23/12/2012 02:04:42 PM
878 Views
- 23/12/2012 02:04:42 PM
878 Views
I agree, but the courts have already ruled that way so we are stuck. *NM*
- 26/12/2012 03:03:35 PM
525 Views
Then I guess we need the courts to rule gun owners need screening, training and licensing.
- 26/12/2012 03:46:05 PM
871 Views
No, if you want to restrict the 2nd (or any other amendment) amend the Constitution
- 26/12/2012 07:56:19 PM
841 Views
I do not want to restrict the Second Amendment, only enact the regulations it explictly allows.
- 26/12/2012 08:50:09 PM
907 Views
I disagree with your interpretation. The simple EXISTANCE of the BoR makes it binding on the states
- 27/12/2012 03:46:17 PM
870 Views
"Congress shall make no law..." restricts the STATES? How, exactly?
- 28/12/2012 03:03:19 PM
835 Views
The 2nd amendment does not mention Congress in any way. There is that reading issue again.
- 28/12/2012 10:02:41 PM
781 Views
You said, "the Bill of Rights," not "the Second Amendment."
- 28/12/2012 11:10:00 PM
871 Views
Copy-N-Paste, get over it. we are specifically discussing the 2nd amendment, not everything.
- 29/12/2012 02:24:30 PM
762 Views
Some semi-autos are easily modified for full auto fire, making the distinction one w/o a difference.
- 21/12/2012 10:53:59 PM
941 Views
Correction: virtually all semi-automatics are easily convertable
- 21/12/2012 11:23:35 PM
879 Views
I have seen nothing on turning a semi-auto BAR into a fully automatic one.
- 22/12/2012 01:11:12 AM
795 Views
What's a BAR? In any event, link a diagram and I'll let you know
- 22/12/2012 01:26:31 AM
791 Views
Confusingly, there are two: The BAR you and I think of, and the "Browning BAR," a current semi-auto
- 22/12/2012 01:07:30 PM
909 Views
Department of Redundancy Department gets to name a lot of stuff, like "Milky Way Galaxy"
- 22/12/2012 05:01:45 PM
1068 Views
It only bothers me when people who know better speak of "the Glieseian solar system." 
- 26/12/2012 05:33:34 PM
951 Views
- 26/12/2012 05:33:34 PM
951 Views
Both terms are pretty stuck now
- 26/12/2012 10:48:38 PM
1017 Views
You realize that encourages rather than discourages my opposition to the usage, right?
- 27/12/2012 01:23:15 AM
794 Views
- 27/12/2012 01:23:15 AM
794 Views
Well I can't say it surprises
- 27/12/2012 04:29:06 AM
733 Views
Yes the media is using terms incorrectly but the point still stands.
- 22/12/2012 03:02:18 AM
795 Views
Re: Yes the media is using terms incorrectly but the point still stands.
- 22/12/2012 04:12:30 AM
852 Views
Yes people can always still kill each other, humans are very ingenuitive
- 22/12/2012 04:42:04 AM
823 Views
I took a driving exam when I was 16, and have never been tested since, nor will I ever be.
- 23/12/2012 01:17:05 PM
969 Views
Never is a long time; just renewing a license requires retaking the eye exam most places.
- 23/12/2012 02:16:54 PM
888 Views
Rather hard to do an eye exam online or through the mail.
- 26/12/2012 03:08:06 PM
971 Views
Yes, it is, which is why I have always had to go by DPS for a new license.
- 26/12/2012 03:50:04 PM
799 Views
Tennessee and Florida pass them out like candy. For several years TN offered a no ID license
- 26/12/2012 08:02:39 PM
807 Views
I still find it odd they require no eye test, that either allows the blind drivers licenses.
- 26/12/2012 08:58:57 PM
853 Views
Oh yeah, we have wandered off course *shrug*
- 27/12/2012 03:55:55 PM
957 Views
Voter registration while getting a drivers license is distinct from the ease of licensing.
- 28/12/2012 03:35:34 PM
930 Views
Re: Voter registration while getting a drivers license is distinct from the ease of licensing.
- 28/12/2012 10:14:32 PM
725 Views
If you can prove someone voted illegally, call the ACLU and claim your $1000.
- 28/12/2012 11:18:38 PM
881 Views
puhleeze.... election fraud is a fact. Pick a state, ANY state, ANY election...
- 29/12/2012 02:41:40 PM
840 Views
Clip size is meaningless, semi-autos and even revolvers can be reloaded VERY quickly. *NM*
- 23/12/2012 01:20:59 PM
524 Views
1997 North Hollywood Shootout
- 22/12/2012 04:07:39 AM
930 Views
typical NRA bullshit response
- 22/12/2012 04:53:40 AM
871 Views
typical Moondog bullshit response
- 23/12/2012 01:06:12 PM
879 Views
of course! there is no connection between having a gun and shooting someone. got it 
- 23/12/2012 02:33:18 PM
763 Views
- 23/12/2012 02:33:18 PM
763 Views
There is no corelation between decidng to kill someone and what tool you use.
- 26/12/2012 03:11:08 PM
825 Views
By that logic no one needs a gun for self-defense; a coffee mug is perfectly adequate.
- 26/12/2012 09:06:51 PM
874 Views
I can kill you with my coffee mug... RESPECT THE MUG but I wouldn't, I might spill the coffee.
- 27/12/2012 04:08:52 PM
736 Views
So you are saying you do not need a gun then? I will keep mine anyway, thanks.
- 28/12/2012 04:19:03 PM
823 Views
- 28/12/2012 04:19:03 PM
823 Views
You covered a bunch of different things, and completely misrepresentted what I wrote
- 28/12/2012 10:28:24 PM
864 Views
Home made explosives are pretty much always illegal; I did not want to overlook legal ones.
- 28/12/2012 11:44:19 PM
1057 Views
Re: Home made explosives are pretty much always illegal; I did not want to overlook legal ones.
- 29/12/2012 03:31:01 PM
808 Views
Laws against murder failed to prevent that, too; clearly they are ineffective and should be repealed
- 22/12/2012 06:02:24 AM
985 Views
Such laws were never intended for prevention, they define actions that will be punished. *NM*
- 23/12/2012 12:57:57 PM
560 Views
So do laws against getting a gun without screening, training and certification.
- 23/12/2012 02:01:32 PM
806 Views
Then CHANGE the Constitution, don't ignore it. *NM*
- 26/12/2012 03:12:11 PM
494 Views
I am not suggesting either changing or ignoring the Constitution.
- 26/12/2012 04:01:02 PM
913 Views
Yes you are.
- 26/12/2012 08:06:01 PM
715 Views
Learn logic, and stop needlessly trying to teach me grammar.
- 26/12/2012 08:55:25 PM
877 Views
Lear to read, and I won't have to
- 27/12/2012 04:28:59 PM
940 Views
Ironically, you misspelled "learn."
- 28/12/2012 05:15:17 PM
1171 Views
- 28/12/2012 05:15:17 PM
1171 Views
I know, I thought about going back and fixing the typo, but thought it was funny so I left it. 
*NM*
- 28/12/2012 10:34:06 PM
521 Views
*NM*
- 28/12/2012 10:34:06 PM
521 Views
2 commas or 4 makes no difference one is a 12D the other is a sentance.
- 28/12/2012 10:55:31 PM
807 Views
It makes a huge difference when (incorrectly) claiming to know the text.
- 28/12/2012 11:31:51 PM
1122 Views
and by REGULATED, the authors meeant "able to use it effectively"
- 29/12/2012 03:47:57 PM
875 Views
You are wrong.
- 22/12/2012 12:14:40 PM
889 Views
That explains much; I read somewhere Brits are averse to it.
- 22/12/2012 01:17:15 PM
812 Views
What bemuses me about this thing with Adam Lanza, is that his mother had 5 registered guns
- 23/12/2012 07:10:26 AM
908 Views
She also had many knives, and blunt objecs around the house. Tools are only as good as the user
- 23/12/2012 01:10:58 PM
900 Views
So clearly she wasn't prepared enough... btw, do we know she was sleeping?
- 27/12/2012 10:52:03 AM
837 Views
That she 1) was in bed, 2) had guns for self-defense and 3) was shot 4 times strongly suggests sleep
- 28/12/2012 11:49:20 PM
912 Views
She was asleep with him in the house.
- 23/12/2012 02:24:47 PM
881 Views
LOOK, look, there is another one...
- 26/12/2012 03:13:45 PM
821 Views
I find the absolutist ant/pro-gun positions equally dangerous and absurd.
- 26/12/2012 04:20:37 PM
796 Views
So we should just *kinda* ignore the Constitution *this* time... But what about NEXT time...
- 26/12/2012 08:08:12 PM
782 Views
No, we should enact gun regulation the Constitution explicitly empowers.
- 26/12/2012 09:02:12 PM
797 Views
Which would be... NONE. *NM*
- 27/12/2012 04:31:53 PM
499 Views
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...."
- 28/12/2012 05:14:49 PM
789 Views
Your point being?
- 27/12/2012 10:47:29 AM
779 Views
I am certain it would have been better, though not good, if she had been awake and shot him.
- 27/12/2012 02:16:13 PM
900 Views
So the situation of Nancy and Adam shooting at each other
- 28/12/2012 07:44:12 AM
907 Views
No, I believe they were both mentally incompetent to have guns; that does not mean EVERYONE is.
- 28/12/2012 02:19:51 PM
823 Views
As a father, I would rather kill my own child than have him kill 26 other people.
- 27/12/2012 04:35:02 PM
736 Views
And as a father, you are somehow clairvoyant?
- 28/12/2012 07:43:08 AM
793 Views
Nice flippant unthinking reply, you and moondog should get together. *NM*
- 28/12/2012 04:55:14 PM
541 Views
How is my reply flippant? Your statement was unthinking, not mine.
- 29/12/2012 06:59:04 AM
832 Views
YOU asked if it would have been better for her to kill her own child instead, I answered.
- 29/12/2012 03:52:02 PM
843 Views
I asked if a shoot out between mother and son had been better, not whether she should have killed
- 29/12/2012 08:54:09 PM
775 Views
You make no sense.
- 31/12/2012 06:07:50 PM
848 Views
I make no sense to you because you probably just don't understand my point.
- 01/01/2013 08:09:11 AM
926 Views
Maybe the heat death of the univers occurs before you finally have a cohearant thought
- 01/01/2013 07:34:31 PM
840 Views
You do realize that resorting to personal attacks reveal an inability to make sound arguments? *NM*
- 02/01/2013 06:01:33 PM
593 Views
That is not an ad hominem attack, and your prior post was not very logically coherent
- 02/01/2013 08:59:16 PM
922 Views
Instead of actually showing why my arguments would be incoherent or why I'm immature, he just said
- 05/01/2013 02:02:23 AM
921 Views