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

To: packrat01
Entirely correct. The Constitution does NOT confer rights.

Correct, it recognizes them.

DC isn't a state, and the Feds can do what they want, in their own District.

Wrong ... as it stands, unless an article has been officially incorporated by the 14th amendment, it ONLY applies to the federal government. "The Second Amendment only stays the hand of the federal government..." If anything, states could enact gun control but Washington DC can't, though I happen to believe that states can't legally either, because the Bill of Rights was meant to be incorporated in full. (What is the purpose of recognizing a right in writing that you think and intend the States to violate?)

11 posted on 06/12/2002 7:16:24 AM PDT by coloradan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]


To: coloradan
coloradan said: "Wrong ... as it stands, unless an article has been officially incorporated by the 14th amendment, it ONLY applies to the federal government."

I strongly disagree. There is no language in the 14th amendment or anywhere in the Constitution which suggests that laws do not have meaning until the Supreme Court specifically says they do. The 14th amendment says that my immunities must be respected by the states. The Second Amendment clearly states that I am immune from any infringement of my right to keep and bear arms.

The Supreme Court invented the incorporation concept by refusing to take cases early on which would clarify the broad meaning of the 14th. Instead they have issued narrow rulings which give them power that the Constitution doesn't.

17 posted on 06/12/2002 10:15:11 AM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | 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