Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BOBWADE

"[T]he phrase 'the right of the people,' only recognizes a right, it is not conferring a right at all. If the constitution conferred rights to the people, then there would be no need for States.


138 posted on 03/13/2007 8:51:43 AM PDT by AZRepublican ("The degree in which a measure is necessary can never be a test of the legal right to adopt it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]


To: AZRepublican
"[T]he phrase 'the right of the people,' only recognizes a right, it is not conferring a right at all. If the constitution conferred rights to the people, then there would be no need for States."

Correct, and in the case of the 2nd amendment it recognizes the individual right is inalienable... cannot be taken away. It must be an individual right... not granted by the founding documents, but rather preexistent.

jw

143 posted on 03/13/2007 9:21:47 AM PDT by JWinNC (www.anailinhisplace.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]

To: AZRepublican

The Bill of Rights must be about rights of our government then huh?

Or could it be that it served to spell out the limits of our government so that the rights of the people would not be infringed. Thats the part you tend to overlook. "people" is not another word for government.


178 posted on 03/14/2007 4:09:18 AM PDT by BOBWADE ("Nothing in life can be achieved without a little sweat and hard work")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson