Posted on 12/06/2015 11:38:27 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
The 2nd was not made to apply to the States, so no they cannot.
A4:S2:C1 appies to the several States.
LOl...don’t know. Just wondering if we’re saying the same thing or I’m losing my mind.
Kasich just lost his vote.
No, anybody can be put on the no-fly list without a trial.
No certified letter. Just a surprise at the airport, usually it happened to me when trying to check in a bag. The skycaps could usually take care of it after talking to "someone"
You didn’t answer my question.
Can a State take away you 2nd A right or not?
Based on Post #61, I do think you are saying the same thing, but I make it a point not to get involved in Domestic FR Disputes.
They never end well my FRiend. LOL
Dude, you're out of your mind.
The Constitution is the law of the land, the States cannot supersede the prohibitions as outlined in it. (see supremacy clause).
The 2nd strictly prohibits the State from infringing on inalienable and God given Rights.
You sound like you belong on another forum, not a God, Gun and Constitution forum.
You put more stock in stare decisis rather than the words of what our Founding Documents read.
Like I posted earlier, an attorney with an agenda.
Originally all of the amendments were expressed limits on the federal government ONLY.
Of course that all changed after the Civil War.
Thanks, I always appreciate your posts, I believe you are a true patriot.
I thought this was more of a Constitutional matter rather than domestic though....but I understand if you don’t want to get involved ;)
But the 10th prohibits the States as well...if not, we don't have a constitution or country.
The letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists made that clear.
There are two levels outrage here; one is that an obvious Irish Catholic name is put on a muslim terror watch list, and the second was how quickly he was removed. Had YOU or I been put on that list, we'd be driving everywhere for life..
Somebody tell me why someone who is ineligible to go through security and get on an airplane is free to walk around on the street.
Need to correct that to, The 2nd strictly prohibits the Government and the State from infringing on inalienable and God given Rights.
Jefferson’s view had adherents but was not the generally held one.
Writing for a *unanimous* court, Chief Justice John Marshall held that the first ten “amendments contain no expression indicating an intention to apply them to the State governments. This court cannot so apply them.” Barron v. Baltimore, 32 U.S. 243, 250.
Some prominent people did have an opposite view.
The cause for the Bill of Rights was very notably the concern to limit the power of the new federal government.
I believe I instituted my “Domestic FR Dispute Non Involvement Policy” about fifteen minutes ago. LL
Thank you for the compliment. I believe most everyone here falls into the category of being a Patriot.
No matter our differences, we are all looking out for America. Unfortunately, there is a whole of lot of “can’t see the Forest for the Trees” thinking that leads to some nasty pissing contests.
Example: The Cruz / Trump Threads are getting out of hand.
As always, this is just my $.02, your Mileage may vary.
If the “no fly list” excludes folks from owning guns, I predict the “no fly list” will soon have over 300 million people on it...by executive order of Barack Mmm Mmm Mmm Obama.
But the 10A were ratified and agreed to by the States....
Specifically that they could not violate the God Given Rights specified by the BOR.
IOW, a State cannot violate your 5th, 4th or any other right considered and defined as unalienable.
My point stands that if we have rights, as protected by the constitution and BOR, we have no rights at all.
I did answer it.
To be able to “take away” something it must be something that can actually be disparaged by said entity because the one trying to remove it is obligated to honor it.
The federal can through its persistent highhanded lawlessness labor to “take away” the rights the Constitution requires it to guarantee.
The States can likewise lawlessly labor to disparage our Privileges and Immunities that they must honor per A4:S2:C1, which are again rights the Constitution requires them to guarantee.
In both cases such efforts are expressly not “lawful”, so please don’t think I’m saying that they are.
One may observe that so-called “progressivism” and other such movements that have labored to cast aside the idea that whatever is not forbidden to the people is lawful for them to a return to whatever is not permitted them is unlawful for them have been after far more than the 2nd Amendment, or even the 1st. It is the 10th that is their real enemy.
They want people to believe that everything is lawful for the federal save for a very few things forbidden ... where the truth is that our Constitution was built on the idea that save for the few permitted Powers everything else is forbidden to the central government.
But you must apply the right part of Law to any governing entity: the 2nd (a right derived from a larger body on unenumerated rights mentioned in the 9th) can be lawlessly disparaged by the federal but not by a State because it was only meant to be binding on one ... and in the same way the States can lawlessly try to disparage our Privileges and Immunities per A4:S2:C1.
When either try to skirt their constitutional obligations to the Citizens, which are far more profound than you seem concerned about, they should be fought at every turn.
But guess what? The federal has not allowed Citizens any Standing in court to challenge its lawlessness since early in the 20th century, instead insisting that a person has to demonstrate a particular to them injury to even try.
Since the founding of the nation until then it had been rightly seen as a fundamental right for a Citizen to pursue private prosecution of a public right, to basically sue the government because it overstepped the bounds of its delegated powers.
But now? They don’t care. The Constitution as Law doesn’t matter to them. Our rightful common law doesn’t matter. We the Citizens don’t matter. We are only subjects in this present tyranny who are still, inaccurately, called “citizens”.
They’ve even got so far in their legal perversions that they now call a fine a “tax” with Obamacare (thank Chief Justice Roberts for that special bit of lawlessness) denying giving people the due process that another Amendment I’m sure you’re familiar with guarantees them, as I reference earlier in the thread.
You speak of my agenda?
Yeah, I’ve got one.
To fight against wooly and imprecise thinking about the Constitution because in worldly matters as in heavenly: only the truth can set us free.
Or perchance I should say that in worldly matters the truth can at least let us know what sort of bondage these so-called “progressives” are laboring to deliver us over to.
A war is not an Amendment to the Constitution.
So, no, it was not changed by simply the fact of the war.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.