SmarterthanYou
rebel
key word is ARMS...........a concept you refuse to acknowledge is that the Constitution was written to restrict the government, not the people. you've now been taught better.
Trump as a constitutional originalist
- Thread starter Truth Detector
- Start date
No, you told us it has to be listed in the Constitution, one has to be able to pinpoint or quote the exact wording.
And “arms” is a generalized term, to imply it automatically means guns is to interpret the word, interpret the Constitution, which any strict constructionist would say isn’t allowed
Basic concept the Enlightenment thinkers and Founding Fathers professed is that rights are based on reason not desire
SmarterthanYou
rebel
1. I said no such thing
2. ARMS means any and all weapons. The historical knowledge and experience of the founders knew that governments limit or prohibit arms in order to rule over the populace.
3. you are still wrong on this.
Ah, you didn’t declare yourself a strict constitutionist, a textual reader of the Constitution?
So how come cherry bombs are banned? Sawed off shotguns? Machine guns purchased since the 1980’s? Can one surround their house with Claiborne mines? How come one can’t buy a quarter stick?
No one, ever, defined Arms in the second amendment as all weapons, in fact just the opposite, read the Heller Majority decision written by Scalia of all people
How is basing rights on reason as opposed desire wrong?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I most certainly AM a strict constitutionalist. not sure where you're going with this.
those weapons are banned because people who don't believe in, or abide by, the constitution allow them.
I've consistently said that the Heller decision is Scalia cowtowing to the majority of freedom hating morons to help their cognitive dissonance in 'shall not be infringed'.
Basing rights on reason has always been the key setup in rulers using crisis issues as measures to restrict freedom.
So if you are a strict constructionist show us where does in the Constitution does it say anything about shotguns. According to strict constructionism if it isn’t there it is not constitutional. And the word “arms” isn’t “shotgun”
SmarterthanYou
rebel
whoever gave you a definition of 'strict constitutionalism' that led you to believe what you say it does, was wrong. The Constitution was written to restrict and limit the government, NOT the people. So when it says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, it means ANY weapons whatsoever, the federal government has no power or authority over.
Then tell us, what does strict constructionism mean to you?
gfm7175
Jesus is LORD!
The post is too long for their short attention spans.
Yeah, whatever, now back to your radio
SmarterthanYou
rebel
It means that the federal government is extremely limited and restricted to ONLY the powers given to them via the Constitution. The Constitution does not give us rights, it prescribes powers to the government. that's it.
That is not answering the question, but you are not going to address the question, so, who decides what powers are only given to the Federal Government? An Air Force, let alone a Space Force,is nowhere mentioned in the Constitution, one of many things, so is the Air Force unconstitutional?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
this statement, above, clearly shows how dumbed down the populace is. We the people decide what powers are given to the federal government because we the people wrote the constitution. All of the allowed violations of government powers are the direct responsibility of we the people because we elect puppets from the two major parties who have no intention of restricting their power in the slightest. So a bill gets written by the powers that be, signed in to law by the powers that be, and adjudicated as lawful and constitutional by the powers that be, all while we the people blindly accept the wrongful concept that the supreme court decides what is, and isn't, constitutional.
in short, you've surrendered your power and accepted what others tell you, no matter how wrong it is.
Beautiful, when asked “who decides what powers are only given to the Federal Government” in the Constitution this one ^ answers “We the people.”
Resembles the first question/answer in rhe Baltimore Catechism, “How do I know God loves us? We know God loves us cause he made us”
And the irony of the responder’s “argument” is the greatest threat to Americans’ individual freedoms is the current Administration’s quest to collect and as much of each American’s personal and private data as they can, and he is one of its biggest supporters
SmarterthanYou
rebel
this^^^^^^ is called 'delusion'. When faced with the reality that he needs to be responsible for himself, instead of placing that responsibility on the government, he goes batshit crazy and projects it on me.
And that ^ is as piss poor as his “we the people” reply
Into the Night
Contributor
1791, anchovies.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
simple questions.
1. who wrote the constitution?
2. who is the final arbiter of what the constitution means?
if your answers are anything but 'we the people', you are wrong.