|
willbeurdaddy -> RE: Clarence Thomas America's Frodo Baggins (9/1/2011 2:14:29 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:
ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY
quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZT!
Survey says ZERO!!!!!
Those are states rights issues, see the 10th. Chicago wants to limit usage and has no state constitutional beef with Illinois, go get em tiger.
They are not anywhere saying you cannot own them, that would be sorta unconstitutional, if you get my drift.
DC. Not a state, but same with Fed.
Strawman and red herring. Not your average pickled fish, I guess.
Ron,
I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.
The current interpretation of the 2nd amendment is that it gives individual US citizens the right to bear personal arms, and that any law - be it federal, state or local - which abridges that right is unconstitutional.
The Chicago lawsuits, and the DC lawsuits are examples of the implementation of that "old-new" interpretation.
The 10th involves states' rights.
Firm
That is a compete misunderstanding of the instrument.
The constitution give the people nothing.
It is the "reservation of rights" of the people.
In other words if I make a contract with you and reserve the rights to kick anyones ass who farts in my house, and then I do kick someones ass for farting in my house and they try to sue me I walk away with damages, both in trespass of my right reserved and for stinking up my house and for court costs.
That constitution is recognition of rights reserved, NOT permission granted.
Nowhere does it say I have to be a citizen to retain and exercise my rights. If it does please cite it.
1/2 correct. It grants rights to the Federal government, and reserves everything else to the States or the people. People means citizens in the context of the Constitution, often being very specific "People of the United States" to be sure that some moron in 2011 wont claim otherwise.
|
|
|
|
