One more Liberal Justice and our 2nd Amendment rights are gone! Judicial appointments?
|
Those on the Left will say that the more conservative Judges also have a ideological slant. No, what you would call their slant is standing up for the Constitution's intent. The constitution was written almost 230 years ago! It couldn't foresee the problems that would come up today. So no one alive today understands what the intent of each constitutional phrase was. Liberals and Conservatives have different interpretations of the constitution, sometimes loose, and sometimes literal. We don't know who's right. But there are some things that the constitutional explicitly says, which can not be argued. FOR EXAMPLE, THE PRESIDENT APPOINTS THE JUSTICES. I agree, in a perfect world the people should vote for the justices, which are nominated by the government. But according to the Constitution right now, that is not the case. The president still has a year in office, and it would be detrimental for the nation if no judge was appointed until next year. 1
point
2
points
1
point
Don't let him bother you, you did good to get the discussion going. The guy's disturbed and venting it on you because he sees it's bugging you. If he knows he can't upset you, he'll get bored with himself....I always ban him, he never participates constructively in any of his four or five screennames I know of Well said, Stash,! It was impractical to create e true democracy when the Constitution was written, so we ended up necessarily with a "republic". Today, we could have a REAL democracy, we could vote by PHONE or other digital device. Republics are second best because they are so easily USED by politics, especially when the rich (or powerful), are allowed carte-blanch on the money and influence they can spread. Examples: The "Republic of Iran, the "Peoples Republics of China, N. Korea, the (apartheid) Republic of S. Africa, etc.etc.. ALL taken over by political entities, which is the way WE are headed if the SCOTUS is allowed to be stacked by those who wish to convince that OUR government doesn't work. It DOES, if allowed! It CAN'T with obstructionism! Here's hoping! I for the life of me could never figure why the Supreme Court never grasped the obvious: that the 2nd Amendment Right to Bear Arms, when written by the Founding Fathers, was referring to a well-organized militia and not every tom dick and harry numbnuts redneck gun lover private citizen. Those were far different times, when the 2nd Amendment was written. We don't need militias anymore. We have more than sufficient law enforcement on the county city and state level. Also on the Federal level with the National Guard. There is zero doubt in my mind that if the Founding Fathers were alive today and were apprised of the State of the State and all of our violence and handgun deaths that they would gladly re-write the 2nd Amendment so as to make it more clear that today, any private citizen who wants to can not own an arsenal, complete with assault rifles. And once those FF's saw we don;t have or need militias anymore they would happily strike that line from the 2nd Amendment. Revise it for our modern times. This is only pure and simple common since, people. So, yeah, one of the the good things about Scalia croaking is that maybe, yeah, Obama can get in a lib Supreme Court Justice who will provide the 5-4 swing vote so we can finally get the 2nd Amendment repealed, and get some of those guns off the streets. Oh, our country had 5000 hand gun deaths last year. During the time it took you to read my post some innocent was killed in this country from a handgun owned by a private citizen. Let us end the madness. We have more handgun deaths in a month than all of Europe does in a YEAR!! Wake-up, gun nuts. Death to the NRA. One of the most injurious organizations in the history of our country. 1
point
Will criminals turn in their firearms ? Show with facts how one makes criminals turn in their firearms ! Now to reduce you to the fool you really are and this will be fun. Are uppers for the AR 15 rifle legal ? That would mean can they be purchased legally. Are 80 percent complete lowers for the AR 15 legal ? That would mean can they be purchased legally. I noticed a change in curriculum of the public schools when I took a government class in high school. I was disappointed that I knew more from before that class than I knew when the class was finished. When I was in lower grades learning US Govt. and US History in the early seventies, the public schools taught that the 2nd Amendment as added as a direct response to the tactics of the British at the beginning of the Rev. War when they attacked Lexington and Concorde knowing the colonists had stockpiles of weapons and gunpowder there. The people were to be guaranteed the right to assemble peacefully, and have the power to resist their government by force if it became too overbearing. The government was have an army to protect against foreign enemies, and the people were to have the power to be an army who could protect themselves against their government which was the motive of the Revolutionary War....to protect the right of the people against the increasingly tyrannical British Government. By the time I reached high school, the references to the historical record of the necessity and adoption of the 2nd Amendment were no longer taught in Government or History classes. I was a wild kid and firmly believed in freedom earned by the shed blood of those who resisted tyrannical governments, and even as a boy I knew something was wrong when they stopped teaching the real history of the 2nd Amendment and started focusing the discussion on a person's right to defend their home and family, and to hunt for food. When the 2nd Amendment was written, there was no argument about a person's right to hunt for food, or to protect their home and family. That was the basic duty of pretty much any man and it was expected and not debated. The 2nd Amendment was designed to ensure that the people always had the power to resist their government if it became tyrannical. Today that power has been taken away, it's gone. The gun laws today are identical to laws Hitler put in place before the iron fist of Nazism crushed any voice of dissent, and they became a nation of murderers. The United States is following the exact same path of Germany with a ruling class building power and limiting freedom, and we are only a two-step short of our Constitution becoming completely meaningless and all of the freedoms which enabled America to rise to greatness are virtually gone now. Now our own government is becoming increasingly tyrannical and the people do not have the power to resist. The people have practically been reduced to an army of slingshots in comparison to the monster that has arisen with an never ending appetite for power....a ruling elite who has sold us out with debts out of control we will never be able to pay, and we like bunch of fat happy cats slept while the monster has been devouring........and practically the whole country happy enough to let it happen as long as they can have their porn, drugs, and entertainments to keep their brains in neutral. Where do you come up with this shit. The founding fathers made numerous quotes that made it obvious they were talking about individuals having the right to possess firearms. If they only wanted a militia to have guns, the 2nd amendment would have read like this: The right of the people to form a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, shall not be infringed. There are two parts to the 2nd amendment, a militia to protect a free state and the peoples' rights to keep and bear arms. They are separate. http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/ http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm So this quote is wrong? "The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun." Patrick Henry American Patriot There are few to none "liberals" that want to destroy the 2nd. WE own guns too. We simply want to DO WHAT WE CAN, however little, to have some common sense regulation which MAY save a life or three, four, five...... I like my guns. As a liberal I wont stand for someone taking them. I, however, have no practical need for high capacity magazines, and not enough ego to NEED an assault weapon, which, in most places, is illegal for hunting. I'm a republican, but I still think that Obama should nominate a justice. He is president for another year, and it is his Constitutional right as president. However, since Congress is controlled by the Republicans, I doubt that any nomination that Obama makes will go through. |
