Blam! Blam!

HazelGod

Sexy Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Posts
7,154
Media
1
Likes
30
Points
183
Location
The Other Side of the Pillow
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
In an historic affirmation of the fact that just over half of the justices sitting on the bench of the US Supreme Court possess reading comprehension skills on par with second-graders, the court has upheld the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.

Cue libtard whinging and fearmongering about increased incidence of massacres and reduced overall public safety. Oh, wait...Feinstein has already begun. :rolleyes:
 

mindseye

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Posts
3,399
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
the court has upheld the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.

Cue libtard whinging ...

This libtard has no objections to upholding the Constitution, only to their picking and choosing which amendments to uphold. I don't see how the 2nd amendment outranks the 1st, 4th, or 9th (to cite a few examples).

For celebrating upholding 1/27th of the amendments, what kind of tard does that make you?
 

jason_els

<img border="0" src="/images/badges/gold_member.gi
Joined
Dec 16, 2004
Posts
10,228
Media
0
Likes
162
Points
193
Location
Warwick, NY, USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
It's an affirmation we've long needed and I welcome it completely. My only concern was that the ruling was so close.

Before anyone says it:

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." - Richard Henry Lee, President of Congress and Representative of Virginia

"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." - Elbridge Gerry, Representative of Massachusetts

THAT is what the founding fathers meant by, militia and why the Supreme Court ruled the way it did.
 

Mr. Snakey

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Posts
21,752
Media
0
Likes
123
Points
193
Sexuality
No Response
It's an affirmation we've long needed and I welcome it completely. My only concern was that the ruling was so close.

Before anyone says it:

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." - Richard Henry Lee, President of Congress and Representative of Virginia

"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty.... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." - Elbridge Gerry, Representative of Massachusetts

THAT is what the founding fathers meant by, militia and why the Supreme Court ruled the way it did.
Thank you for saying what some may not know. No surprise on this ruling at all.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
This libtard has no objections to upholding the Constitution, only to their picking and choosing which amendments to uphold. I don't see how the 2nd amendment outranks the 1st, 4th, or 9th (to cite a few examples).

For celebrating upholding 1/27th of the amendments, what kind of tard does that make you?
I'm not really aware of too many violations of any of the amendments after #14. Have you heard of any?

I agree, the SCOTUS has an abysmal record of Constitutional understanding and decisions. The 2nd amendment ruling is a good start, and now I'm ready to see them start defending and upholding the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 14th amendments. Those seem to be the most commonly "disregarded" by our executive branch and our judiciary.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
My concerns of handgun violence notwithstanding, I understand the decision as a matter of constitutionality and support their defense of the 2nd amendment.

As DC DEEP pointed out, it is past time that they make locals uphold the other amendments as well.
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
think Justice Cardozo
That's still not very clear. Are you referring to his 14th amendment interpretations, or his 10th amendment interpretations?

The Constitution does not enumerate all citizen rights; it enumerates limitations on the government to suppress citizen rights.
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
his approach, which enables tards of different stripes to enact their ideologies into law:

From a NY Times op piece:


During Cardozo's time (and ours), critics have charged that judicial law-making is simply a euphemism for the judge's imposing his personal values. Cardozo, disagreeing, maintained that there are restraints against judges' doing so.
He asserted that a judge's power of innovation is ''insignificant . . . when compared with the bulk and pressure of rules that hedge him on every side.'' A judge ''legislates only between gaps,'' he said. ''He fills the open spaces in the law.'' The restrictions to which Cardozo paid special attention included the claims of legal precedent, logic and history.





In law school, one is under the injunction to:


READ THE STATUTE. READ THE STATUTE. READ THE STATUTE.

i.e., follow the intent and meaning, not create it ... logic may be inapposite, or mis-informed ... history is fraught with the teller's intent

hence, the imposition of libertard ideology into American law, (e.g., Roe vs. Wade)


 

mindseye

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Posts
3,399
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
and hopefully not create rights out of thin air
think Justice Cardozo


The Ninth Amendment is not thin air:

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.


The Constitution clearly states that the people have rights that aren't specifically spelled out. Justice Cardozo (I suspect this is a dogwhistle for Palko) wasn't around when the Ninth Amendment was written, so he couldn't have "created" these unenumerated rights.
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The Constitution clearly states that the people have rights that aren't specifically spelled out. Justice Cardozo (I suspect this is a dogwhistle for Palko) wasn't around when the Ninth Amendment was written, so he couldn't have "created" these unenumerated rights.


ah! but most ideologies are thin air: McCarthyism; John Birch; NAMBLA; women's lib; black power, etc, etc

how are those enumerated rights to be identified and protected?

compliance with passing fads?


how does one make a leap from "privacy" (not enumerated) to "woman's right to abortion" (not enumerated), and outside of our tradition?

and how does that escape strict prohibitions against "murder', well-defined as the taking of the life of another person, but by playing around with objective facts, a tactic used by ideologues of any of the mentioned ideologies?
 

DC_DEEP

Sexy Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Posts
8,714
Media
0
Likes
93
Points
183
Sexuality
No Response
ah! but most ideologies are thin air: McCarthyism; John Birch; NAMBLA; women's lib; black power, etc, etc

how are those enumerated rights to be identified and protected?

compliance with passing fads?

how does one make a leap from "privacy" (not enumerated) to "woman's right to abortion" (not enumerated), and outside of our tradition?

and how does that escape strict prohibitions against "murder', well-defined as the taking of the life of another person, but by playing around with objective facts, a tactic used by ideologues of any of the mentioned ideologies?
Please re-read the bill of rights... carefully.

Not enumerated specifically means that, as long as it does not infringe the rights of others, my rights are unlimited. It does not have to be specified in the Constitution for me to retain certain rights... that's the point.

Murder is not a good analogy. I don't have the right to murder, because that infringes the right of the victim to live. "Women's lib", and "black power," as you so quaintly call them, are actually enumerated - in the 14th amendment.
 

B_Nick4444

Expert Member
Joined
Nov 24, 2007
Posts
6,849
Media
0
Likes
104
Points
193
Location
San Antonio, TX
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Please re-read the bill of rights... carefully.

Not enumerated specifically means that, as long as it does not infringe the rights of others, my rights are unlimited. It does not have to be specified in the Constitution for me to retain certain rights... that's the point.

Murder is not a good analogy. I don't have the right to murder, because that infringes the right of the victim to live. "Women's lib", and "black power," as you so quaintly call them, are actually enumerated - in the 14th amendment.

what the 14th Amendment circumscribes is governmental power ...

read what prescriptions "women's lib" and "black power" ideologies hold