• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who enforces the constitution?

Crimefree said:
Right alongside the guns Hilliary promised to ban
Click to expand...

And, if she had won and then argued her gun control measure was not a ban, you could have brought that up. But, since she didn't, I can ask. What the hell are you whining about?
 
AlbqOwl said:
It was intended by the U.S. Constitution that the federal government have no power not designated by that Constitution. And it was clear at the time of its ratification that the Congress was given the sole power at the federal level to make laws subject to the signature or veto of the President. The President was given no power to make laws but was charged to implement/applicate/enforce the laws passed by Congress and signed into law by himself. And in matters of dispute of implementation and application, the court would settle what the intent of the law was. The court was given no authority to negate laws or make laws.

In my opinion, the Founders would see a law declared unconstitutional by the court as the responsibility of CONGRESS--the elected representatives of the people--to overturn or amend and that would not be a power given to the Court to do.

As it is now, the court has 100% power over the President and Congress to make the law into anything the judge or judges want it to be.

And that is very wrong and a very dangerous situation for we the people.
Click to expand...

Sure government may do as it wants just like any citizen. However like citizens governments laws are policed by the courts and congress as welll as the powers of States. When that fails and government enforces its unconstitutional laws what then?

BTW it is easy for government to control congress and the States either by corruption, bribery, holding to ransom or by force. The founders most certainly did not rely totally on governments good behaviour. So the question really is what then, where does the chain stop?
 
calamity said:
And, if she had won and then argued her gun control measure was not a ban, you could have brought that up. But, since she didn't, I can ask. What the hell are you whining about?
Click to expand...

You are the one whining here about irrelevancy. Trump is not going to build a wall and only an idiot would take him at his blustering word. At least he does not throw hissy fits about guns which neither you or the witch can prove are a problem or responsible of any crimes.
 
calamity said:
You must have meant to write "those who live in fear of Muslims."
Click to expand...

They actually have proof that some Muslims are very dangerous characters and the religion itself is not a peaceful accepting religion.. As against those who fear inanimate objects. Bonkers the lot of them. Stark raving lunatics who should be locked up before they do more damage.

Looks like you have another hole in your foot
 
Crimefree said:
You are the one whining here about irrelevancy. Trump is not going to build a wall and only an idiot would take him at his blustering word. At least he does not throw hissy fits about guns which neither you or the witch can prove are a problem or responsible of any crimes.
Click to expand...

He set aside $4B to build this wall you claim he is not building. :roll:
 
Crimefree said:
They actually have proof that some Muslims are very dangerous characters and the religion itself is not a peaceful accepting religion.. As against those who fear inanimate objects. Bonkers the lot of them. Stark raving lunatics who should be locked up before they do more damage.

Looks like you have another hole in your foot
Click to expand...

Well, there seems to be a lot of proof that guns in the wrong hands are very dangerous.
 
calamity said:
Well, there seems to be a lot of proof that guns in the wrong hands are very dangerous.
Click to expand...

No one denies that. We very much differ on solutions to that problem, and indeed, the magnitude of the details of that problem.
 
Thoreau72 said:
I agree with much of what you say there, but your claim that the judiciary can make the law into anything it wants it to be is not correct. Yes, the judiciary can critique legislation and declare it constitutional or not, but it cannot "make it into anything it wants it to be". Well, maybe excepting the ACA when the court declared it to be a tax. ;)

But the power to strike or approve a law is what the judiciary is all about, isn't it?

It's been years since I've studied the law, but I did take some courses years ago, and as I recall, every statute gets a blessing as being 'constitutional'. It's never thoroughly judged until someone gets it to court.
Click to expand...

But the unscrupulous have learned to use the courts effectively for their unscrupulousness (is that a word?) When federal laws in 1964 and further expanded in 1976 allowed those suing in civil rights cases to collect lawyer fees and some other expenses, the ACLU was scouring the countryside to find somebody with standing who would say that a historical cross on a government shield or a religious piece of art was offensive to them so they could sue. It became extremely lucrative for them. And now with a hugely leftist court system in place, it is almost impossible for common sense to prevail in almost any social issue.

So it is entities like the 9th Circuit et al who work hand in hand with the opportunistic leftists to dismantle anything traditional or seen as non-'progressive' and thereby slowly are making progressivism the law of the land.
 
AlbqOwl said:
But the unscrupulous have learned to use the courts effectively for their unscrupulousness (is that a word?) When federal laws in 1964 and further expanded in 1976 allowed those suing in civil rights cases to collect lawyer fees and some other expenses, the ACLU was scouring the countryside to find somebody with standing who would say that a historical cross on a government shield or a religious piece of art was offensive to them so they could sue. It became extremely lucrative for them. And now with a hugely leftist court system in place, it is almost impossible for common sense to prevail in almost any social issue.

So it is entities like the 9th Circuit et al who work hand in hand with the opportunistic leftists to dismantle anything traditional or seen as non-'progressive' and thereby slowly are making progressivism the law of the land.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the real problem is government controls the education system so today everyone thinks the most powerful entity and last stop of action in righting governments wrongs is the courts. ie the view the government is supreme. Is that the case? Is that the correct view or are we missing something in our willingness to accept governments word on our rights?
 
AlbqOwl said:
But the unscrupulous have learned to use the courts effectively for their unscrupulousness (is that a word?) When federal laws in 1964 and further expanded in 1976 allowed those suing in civil rights cases to collect lawyer fees and some other expenses, the ACLU was scouring the countryside to find somebody with standing who would say that a historical cross on a government shield or a religious piece of art was offensive to them so they could sue. It became extremely lucrative for them. And now with a hugely leftist court system in place, it is almost impossible for common sense to prevail in almost any social issue.

So it is entities like the 9th Circuit et al who work hand in hand with the opportunistic leftists to dismantle anything traditional or seen as non-'progressive' and thereby slowly are making progressivism the law of the land.
Click to expand...

What you have described is in part exactly what both government and gun control does. It pollutes the system by increasing public demand with false promises in order to obtain greater power for government. Power is the opiate of government and the greedy. It is the only currency of politics. The only way of breaking this chain is for the people to say no and mean it. Government cannot exist without the consent of the people. It is who controls that consent that is the problem. If government or gun control, the people are in big trouble. Both want power over the people.
 
calamity said:
Well, there seems to be a lot of proof that guns in the wrong hands are very dangerous.
Click to expand...

Strawman argument used as deflection.

Anything in the wrong hands may be dangerous. Even a apple can be used to choke somebody, what of it. Since this applies to virtually every tool and implement and some objects WTF is your point. Were you relying on others to be hysterical over your claim and have visions of mayhem or something?

The other foot just got a hole
 
Crimefree said:
Perhaps the real problem is government controls the education system so today everyone thinks the most powerful entity and last stop of action in righting governments wrongs is the courts. ie the view the government is supreme. Is that the case? Is that the correct view or are we missing something in our willingness to accept governments word on our rights?
Click to expand...

The Founders intended that the federal government would be given no jurisdiction to dictate what were and were not our unalienable rights, or dictate any institutional rights other than what was specified in the Constitution. The courts have been regularly giving the federal government powers it was never intended to have. For instance, when the 9th Circuit declared that gay marriage could not be banned, right or wrong that was assumed to become the law of the land. It was never declared so by the legislature and never voted on by the people, but we are all now assumed to be bound to it.

And carrying it to other probabilities and/or even absurdities that might not be so absurd, the court could just as easily overturn any other marriage laws or laws regarding children or any other laws that now exist among the states and establish whatever principles a judge personally thinks should apply nationwide. In so doing the court effectively removes the liberty from the people and establishes national law.
 
Crimefree said:
What you have described is in part exactly what both government and gun control does. It pollutes the system by increasing public demand with false promises in order to obtain greater power for government. Power is the opiate of government and the greedy. It is the only currency of politics. The only way of breaking this chain is for the people to say no and mean it. Government cannot exist without the consent of the people. It is who controls that consent that is the problem. If government or gun control, the people are in big trouble. Both want power over the people.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you, but the insidious creep of progressivism has increasingly made of government a god, nanny, Santa Claus, and fairy godmother all rolled into one. So long as the government is ruled by progressives, the progressives do not care what power government has or what power it exercises. The more they can force non progressives to accept and endure progressiveness, they are happy campers. And because the education system, science, and media have been overtaken by progressives, they are able to brainwash more and more of the young to believe as they believe, which is that government should be able to suppress and put down any challenges to the progressive doctrine.

Right now we do not have a progressive government in Washington and you can witness for yourself the angst, hysteria, and pure warfare being launched against it from the progressive side. But I fear there aren't enough of us non-progressives left to provide the support and encouragement the government needs to start digging us out of the mess that progressiveness has made.
 
calamity said:
Well, there seems to be a lot of proof that guns in the wrong hands are very dangerous.
Click to expand...

There is exponentially more proof that guns in the right hands are no more dangerous than alcohol or cars. Using your "Trump think", do you disagree there seems to be a lot of proof that illegal immigrants and Muslims are dangerous? That logic is pretty stupid.

Funny how you can recognize that logic as asinine in one instance and yet rationalize it as justifiable in another.
 
Crimefree said:
Strawman argument used as deflection.

Anything in the wrong hands may be dangerous. Even a apple can be used to choke somebody, what of it. Since this applies to virtually every tool and implement and some objects WTF is your point. Were you relying on others to be hysterical over your claim and have visions of mayhem or something?

The other foot just got a hole
Click to expand...

When nearly 20,000 people die per year by intentional misuse of apples like they do firearms, be sure to start a thread. :roll:
 
BretJ said:
There is exponentially more proof that guns in the right hands are no more dangerous than alcohol or cars. Using your "Trump think", do you disagree there seems to be a lot of proof that illegal immigrants and Muslims are dangerous? That logic is pretty stupid.

Funny how you can recognize that logic as asinine in one instance and yet rationalize it as justifiable in another.
Click to expand...

Americans with guns intentionally kill more people than alcohol, cars, illegal immigrants and Muslims do combined. In fact, rare is a murder or intentional suicide by alcohol or even by car. Although, I guess you could spin that alcohol mixed with a car that results in a death is intentional...but that would be a far cry from pulling a trigger and blowing out someone's brains.
 
calamity said:
I told you the other side doesn't care about their boi ****ting on the Constitution. Thanks for confirming it.
Click to expand...

You can't even tell us how he violated The Constitution. :lamo
 
calamity said:
When nearly 20,000 people die per year by intentional misuse of apples like they do firearms, be sure to start a thread. :roll:
Click to expand...


Strawman argument, irrelevant and used as a deflection. This is getting boringly monotonous, are you not even capable of defending you own asinine comments

Anything in the wrong hands may be dangerous. Even a apple can be used to choke somebody, what of it? Since this applies to virtually every tool and implement and some objects WTF is your point? Were you relying on others to be hysterical over your claim and have visions of mayhem or something?

The other foot just got a bigger hole
 
calamity said:
Americans with guns intentionally kill more people than alcohol, cars, illegal immigrants and Muslims do combined. In fact, rare is a murder or intentional suicide by alcohol or even by car. Although, I guess you could spin that alcohol mixed with a car that results in a death is intentional...but that would be a far cry from pulling a trigger and blowing out someone's brains.
Click to expand...

Well now all you have to do is claim if they did not have guns there would be far less murder. Please do. Otherwise you could tell the truth that a person intending to murder somebody is just using a handy tool but any other tool will do including but not limited to bats, knives, ashtrays, scissors, rope, pantihose, fry pans, rollers, spoons, planks, bars, chains, spades, axes, pillows, cushions, stones, cliffs, bridges, buildings, vehicles, knitting needles, hypodermic syringes, plastic bags, bottles..... and guns have nothing to do with the act other than as a tool.

Which is it? Try to give a sensible EVIDENCED answer this time there is not much left of either foot.
 
AlbqOwl said:
I don't disagree with you, but the insidious creep of progressivism has increasingly made of government a god, nanny, Santa Claus, and fairy godmother all rolled into one. So long as the government is ruled by progressives, the progressives do not care what power government has or what power it exercises. The more they can force non progressives to accept and endure progressiveness, they are happy campers. And because the education system, science, and media have been overtaken by progressives, they are able to brainwash more and more of the young to believe as they believe, which is that government should be able to suppress and put down any challenges to the progressive doctrine.

Right now we do not have a progressive government in Washington and you can witness for yourself the angst, hysteria, and pure warfare being launched against it from the progressive side. But I fear there aren't enough of us non-progressives left to provide the support and encouragement the government needs to start digging us out of the mess that progressiveness has made.
Click to expand...

Am I to assume the founding fathers left us powerless to stop people from being cultured and "brain-washed". The correct word here is indoctrinated which is the desired result of propaganda. To manipulate peoples thoughts and actions.

Are we powerless and must sit and watch our rights going down the toilet?
 
calamity said:
He set aside $4B to build this wall you claim he is not building. :roll:
Click to expand...

Did he actually have the money to set aside? Was it his to use as he thought fit? You don't do much checking do you.

Just as an aside unless that wall was so high it cannot be climbed, so wide it cannot be tunnelled under and patrolled 24/7 it would be a waste of money and Trump does not waste money. Obana and the witch do that.
 
apdst said:
You can't even tell us how he violated The Constitution. :lamo
Click to expand...

Violation of habeas corpus, freedom of religion and the Emoluments Clause.
 
Crimefree said:
Did he actually have the money to set aside? Was it his to use as he thought fit? You don't do much checking do you.

Just as an aside unless that wall was so high it cannot be climbed, so wide it cannot be tunnelled under and patrolled 24/7 it would be a waste of money and Trump does not waste money. Obana and the witch do that.
Click to expand...

Translation: Crimefree was wrong about Trump not building the wall and is now spinning and flailing to pretend he didn't say Trump was not building the wall. :lol:
 
calamity said:
Violation of habeas corpus, freedom of religion and the Emoluments Clause.
Click to expand...

People in other countries aren't entitled to those protections. Plus, he never denied anyone the right to practice whatever religion they choose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom