|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,610
Posts546,962
Members14,427
| |
Most Online1,344
Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99 |
once again scut and his toadie fail to intimidate those who attempt to engage others in the gentlemanly exchange of ideas...
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
You would be worried that I'd lost my senses to be corrupted by anyone to make an arbitrary grab for guns wherever they were going, pro-gun or otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99 |
king, and others here who wish to engage in gentlemanly civil discourse... regarding the rights of u.s. citizens, it is my premise that the articles of the u.s. federal constitution define the powers and responsibilities of the federal central government as delegated to it by the states and the people... and, that the first ten amendments to that federal constitution, aka, the bill of rights, specifically prohibit the federal central government from involvement in any way with the rights of the states and the people in certain specific areas...
however, there is nothing specific nor implied in the bill of right that prohibit the states or the people from their involvement in those specific areas...
do you agree?
Last edited by ed good; 06/25/16 05:11 PM.
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438
Sidelock
|
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438 |
The 2nd Amendment IS an unalienable right.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
How many angels . . .? From Arizona Jim's claimed 20,000 gun laws emanating from municipal, state and federal jurisdictions it seems to me that states are involved negatively and positively concerning gun rights (and others) in certain specific areas, as you say, but subordinate to constitutional law as interpreted by the Court. Short answer, and I'm sure there are many others, but mine is from the federal showdown on Alabama's rights when the 101st and 102nd Airborne enforced the constitutional right of James Meredith to enrol at Ole Miss in 1962. I was there. A colleague Paul Guihard was killed on the campus that night.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,466 Likes: 213
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,466 Likes: 213 |
A 100%, as long as it's reasonable.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
+1, for the shorter answer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99 |
so, then it all comes back to what is then each individuals idea of what is reasonable? if so, then there are no rules. no right nor wrong, only what makes one feel warm and fuzzy? gotta be more to running a society than that?
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,760 Likes: 99 |
and king, as to enforcing the federal right of james meredith or anybody else to attend the university of mississippi, where in the articles or bill of rights was the power and responsibility delegated to the federal government to do such a thing?
Last edited by ed good; 06/25/16 06:46 PM.
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
There are rules, decided by our institutions at the wish of electorates, that change with the times, adjudicated by your highest court which is currently mostly conservative. Collectives, not individuals as you and me, make laws. Or am I missing something, Ed?
|
|
|
|
|
