Yes you are.
I'm arguing that the Federal government can't mess with our rights to bear arms because of the Second Amendment, and you morons call me a "Brady Buncher"...which is equating me to people who support unconstitutional gun-grabbing legislation passed by the Federal government.
Then I say that the Constitution didn't need to address the issue of bearing arms for the States because the State Constitutions had already done so, and for saying that, you call me ignorant, yet, that's exactly what happened.
You are ignorant because you think history is what you think that it is instead of what it really was, and that the country runs other than how it runs.
You're fixated on the word "incorporation" as if this word is a bad thing.
Incorporation is what the Courts call the method that they've used to make certain that the intent of the 14th Amendment is followed by the States, without the rights retained by the States being violated. It's a method to achieve the proper implementation of the 14th Amendment.
Now, if things were as you say that they were, then with the passing of the 14th Amendment, the Constitutions of the several States would become muted on the subject of arms, as all power would transfer to the Federal government. By NOT incorporating the Second Amendment, the Courts have effectively raised a wall of separation between the Feds and your guns. Additionally, if the Courts incorporate the Second, then all regulations on the subject of arms and citizens would emanate from the Federal level.
Maybe YOU want to place that much power on the Federal government, but I'd rather stay with the original plan as set up by the Founders, and keep the Feds out of it altogether.
So yes...you're both shortsighted and ignorant.
No. You aren't. You are arguing that the States, a subordinate government to the FedGov, can infringe on RKBA.
So yes. That makes you a gun grabber. And stupid to boot..
'Brady Bunchers' claim that States can infringe because the 2nd does not apply to local or state governments. -- Just as you have admitted..
Then I say that the Constitution didn't need to address the issue of bearing arms for the States because the State Constitutions had already done so, and for saying that, you call me ignorant, yet, that's exactly what happened.
Some State Constitutions supposedly allow "infringements", & in fact California's supposedly allows outright prohibitions. -- You support States having such powers, admit it.
You are ignorant because you think history is what you think that it is instead of what it really was, and that the country runs other than how it runs.
That's the issue here luis; you think our RtKBA's can be infringed by local & state gov'ts because there is a "history" of that's how the "country runs".
Admit it. You support gun grabs.
You're fixated on the word "incorporation" as if this word is a bad thing.
Incorporation is what the Courts call the method that they've used to make certain that the intent of the 14th Amendment is followed by the States, without the rights retained by the States being violated. It's a method to achieve the proper implementation of the 14th Amendment.
Now, if things were as you say that they were, then with the passing of the 14th Amendment, the Constitutions of the several States would become muted on the subject of arms, --
That was exactly the intent of the 14ths framers, if you bother to read the congressional debates from 1868.
as all power would transfer to the Federal government.
Nope, all power would have remained within US Constitutional bounds. Neither Fed, State nor local gov't would have the power to infringe.
By NOT incorporating the Second Amendment, the Courts have effectively raised a wall of separation between the Feds and your guns.
Hogwash. Fed/State/local gov'ts ALL feel free to infringe, -- because the Courts refuse to honor the 2nd as written.
Additionally, if the Courts incorporate the Second, then all regulations on the subject of arms and citizens would emanate from the Federal level.
If the Courts acknowledge the Second as written, then all regulations on the subject of arms and citizens would emanate from a US Constitutional level. Gun-grabbers would then go berserk.
Maybe YOU want to place that much power on the Federal government, but I'd rather stay with the original plan as set up by the Founders, and keep the Feds out of it altogether.
Yep under your "plan", you want States like CA to have the power to prohibit ugly black rifles. -- Admit it luis.
So yes...you're both shortsighted and ignorant.
Whatever.