View Poll Results: See OP for 2-pat question

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • The court will hear the case (or one like it)

    11 50.00%
  • The court will NOT hear the case (or one like it)

    1 4.55%
  • The court will incorporate the 2nd against the states

    8 36.36%
  • The court will NOT incorporate the 2nd against the states

    4 18.18%
  • Other

    2 9.09%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 13 of 17 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 164

Thread: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

  1. #121
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:01 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,673

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    And, how do you support an opinion regarding a matter of law when you automatically dismiss any and every decision made by any any and every court?
    Maybe we should ask Plessy?
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  2. #122
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:01 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,673

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    No, no interpretation, just the bald facts about clauses and compound sentences.
    This is getting stupid.

    - You said that the Constitution is written in simple English and needs no interpretation.
    - You have repeatedly MISUNDERSTOOD and TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT things that I have stated IN SIMPLE ENGLISH.
    - I mention that, since you are having trouble comprehending my simple English, there is an INTERPRETATION ISSUE
    - This means that, logically, simple English can be INTERPRETED IN DIFFERENT WAYS depending on the reader
    - Hence, the Constitution, written in simple English, can be INTERPRETED IN DIFFERENT WAYS DEPENDING ON THE READER.
    - This DOES NOT mean that the Constitution has different meanins
    - This DOES mean that one Interpretation is incorrect.

    Does that help you a little? I am sure that you feel that you read everything that I have typed perfectly, but when you repeat it back, it is not accurate. I am sure that you don't agree, but I am the one that knows what I am not only saying, but meaning. I am sure that you don't understand a single aspect of what I am talking about, even though it is written in SIMPLE ENLGISH!


    Not as bad as your memory. . . .
    You are taking it out of context... again. I said that it is clear and concise, and that means the meaning of it is just that. It has nothing to do with how I feel, that is just a statement regarding how it is.


    Ablative absolute is a Latin construction, and imitations thereof in English are common in the works of authors who were well studied in Latin. The founders were such authors, and I am certain that our second amendment reads exactly as they meant it to read. I'll take the founder's decision, since they were well studied in Latin, over yours, as to how it "should read".
    "Should read" is how it DOES READ. It can flip flop either was, and it means that same exact thing. I am only translating it into the language of today so that you, and others like Goobieman, can understand it.


    Furthermore, it is still a dependant clause construction, and the ablative absolute is not an exclusionatory construction. What that means is, it merely points out one good reason, possibly among many, for what stands alone in the independent clause. It does NOT rule out other reasons or circumstances.
    Possibly among many? And you are trying to say that there is no "Interpretation"?
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  3. #123
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Did you ever notice that there's a difference between an individual right against the fed gov. and an individual right against the state? Guess not.
    I don't waste time trying to notice that which doesn't exist.

    The Constitution's Bill of Rights applies to all people, and thus regulates the states.

    Get used to it. It's history.

  4. #124
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Smash23 View Post
    Amendments only supersede those parts of the Constitution that they change, if they change part of the original at all.
    Very good!

    So if the body of the Constitution does not mention arms, and the Second Amendment says the right of the people to keep them and bear them shall not be infringed, which takes precedence? Right! The people get to keep their guns, the government gets to butt out.

  5. #125
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    40,504

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    SCOTUS is fallible, and this has been addressed a million times... why do you choose to ignore it? Oh, because you agree with THIS decision, that is why.

    You are absolutely correct. SCOTUS has screwed up royally on several notable occasions.

    What I think many of us would like to know is, whether Smash has anything backing up his position other than just opinion?

    He doesn't accept original intent, and I presume constructionism is out.
    He doesn't agree with existing SCOTUS law on the subject.
    I'm wondering if there's anything more there than "the Constitution should mean whatever I WANT it to mean!"

    G.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  6. #126
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Smash23 View Post
    But the second amendment has not currently been incorporated, which means it does not currently apply to the states (except for in the 9th circuit).
    The Second Amendment applied to all states the day the final state ratified the Bill of Rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Smash23 View Post
    The Bill of Rights did not originally apply to the states, just the federal government.
    They do now.

    Every single one of them.

    Have done so for the longest time.

    Guess what?

    The Second Amendment applies to all fifty states. The states aren't required to pass any laws of their own or nothin', the Constitution has supreme authority.

    Has ever since it was ratified, even if it took a war to settle that issue.

  7. #127
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    SCOTUS is fallible, and this has been addressed a million times... why do you choose to ignore it? Oh, because you agree with THIS decision, that is why.
    The decision that states the Second Amendment is an individual right is consistent with the pre-Miller interpretation. Miller was based on numerous errors and flaws, and is wrong.

    There's that.

    Then there's the Second Amendment's use of the phrase "the people", not "the militias", a disctinction the men that wrote the Amendment, being master of the language they were, would have made if that distinction was intended.

    There's that.

    Then, of course, we all know there are two kinds of people in the world, those with loaded guns and those who dig.

    I don't feel like digging.

  8. #128
    Sage
    Bodhisattva's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Zealand
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:01 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,673

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    You are absolutely correct. SCOTUS has screwed up royally on several notable occasions.

    What I think many of us would like to know is, whether Smash has anything backing up his position other than just opinion?

    He doesn't accept original intent, and I presume constructionism is out.
    He doesn't agree with existing SCOTUS law on the subject.
    I'm wondering if there's anything more there than "the Constitution should mean whatever I WANT it to mean!"

    G.
    Good questions, I am a little screwy and think that the individual right is wrapped in the collective right concerning militias. I have adjusted my stance, which used to be more like Smash's, I think.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The Supreme Court can't interpret The Constitution. They don't have that power.

  9. #129
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    01-05-10 @ 05:26 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,629

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    They have no choice they will rule against Chicago like they did with DC.

    The 2nd Adm is very clear on this.

  10. #130
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,241
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Smash23 View Post
    While personally I don't believe that the Second Amendment applies to regular citizens being able to own guns

    I am genuinely curious as to your interpretation of the 2A. Who do you believe it grants arms to?

Page 13 of 17 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •