Quote of the day
. . . the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences.
10 Responses to “Quote of the day”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
January 5th, 2006 at 11:36 am
I would say their allegiance is with their audience just as it was with the border. Their only concern is not the safety of the public, but rather their own individual careers. Anyone that thinks that decisions are made in Washington that does not benefit their pocketbooks, personal careers, or someone elses pocketbook that has something to offer them are blind to our entire system.
January 5th, 2006 at 4:41 pm
You could make the same argument about the 9th
January 5th, 2006 at 6:03 pm
You could, assuming you could get any two people to agree as to WTF it means.
January 5th, 2006 at 6:35 pm
If one reads the 2nd Amendment according to the rules of English grammar, it’s easy as to what it means. If one reads the Preamble to the Bill of Rights it’s obvious that it declares the “right of the people” and RESTRICTS the government from infringing on the same:
“THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order TO PREVENT MISCONSTRUCTION or ABUSE OF ITS POWERS, that further DECLARATORY and RESTRICTIVE clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.”
And grammatically speaking:
The subordinate clause “A well-regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free State” does NOT negate the independent or main clause “the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”
“Suppose the Second amendment said ‘A well-educated electorate being
necessary for self-governance in a free state, the right of the people to keep and
read books shall not be infringed.’ Is there anyone who would suggest that means
only registered voters have a right to keep and read books?”–Robert Levy, Georgetown
University Professor
If one reads the 2nd Amendment historical meaning of “militia” it’s obvious that it means an armed citizenry. The Bill of Rights, ratified in 1791, could not have meant the National Guard established in 1903. “Militia” is clearly contra-distincted from “standing army” in the Contitution.
“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we
shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power
to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the
soldier, are the birth-right of an American … The unlimited power of the
sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where
I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People.” –Tench Coxe
(1788)
“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be
properly armed.”–Alexander Hamilton
“The Militia is composed of free Citizens. There is therefore no danger of
their making use of their power to the destruction of their own Rights, or
suffering others to invade them.”–Samuel Adams
“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves…and
include all men capable of bearing arms.”
-Richard Henry Lee, Additional Letters from the Federal Farmer (1788)
If the politicians and government agents who want to ignore all this and think it’s a good idea to disarm us, why don’t they disarm themselves first and show us why it’s such a good idea??
January 5th, 2006 at 6:48 pm
I know. I was talking about the Ninth Amendment, not the Second.
January 5th, 2006 at 7:49 pm
Xrlq,
I stand corrected. I should have read your comment in its immediate context of the previous comment by Rick DeMent and not according to “the quote of the day” post by SayUncle.
But I do think that the 9th Amendment is quite clear. Just because certain rights are enumerated (specifically named) in the Bill of Rights does not negate those which they didn’t mentioned being “retained by the people.” For instance, the original 10 did not enumerate the right to vote, but it was added later (15th Amendment) as one to be secured. Another right, implied from the 2nd Amendment, is that of armed self-defense. Although not enuerated, it is the most basic of human rights in my considered opinion.
Also, the government has NO rights, only “delegated powers” from the people. Only people have rights which are pre-existing or God-given with or without our Constitution according to our Declaration of Independence.
January 5th, 2006 at 9:09 pm
The Ninth Amendment is unclear on two levels. For one, it’s unclear as to whether or not it is intended to protect any “constitutional” rights not enumerated in the Constitution, or whether it is merely intended to prevent anyone arguing that such-and-such can’t be a right solely because it’s not a constitutional one. For another, it offers no insight at all as to which rights are retained by the people. For some it’s a right to abortion. For others, a right to stop paying taxes. For others still, it’s whatever the hell other “right” they feel like asserting. Hence Robert Bork’s much maligned “ink blot” analogy.
January 5th, 2006 at 10:28 pm
Xrlq,
I think IF the 9th Amendment is read in context of all the Constitution the confusion is largely resolved. Your example about the right not to pay taxes is reconciled in that taxing is a “delegated power” of the government. The intention of the 9th Amendment and all the other Bill of Rights is explained by the Preamble to the Bill of Rights that I have already quoted. Accordingly any amendment should further enumerate or be “declarative” of the rights of the people and be “restrictive” of government power or specifically define and limit it.
Certainly not all amemdments have done that. I think, for example, that the 16th Amendment should be repealed and limit the delegated power of the government to tax only to an indirect one as it was originally according to Article I, Section 8.
January 5th, 2006 at 11:08 pm
That may be your preference, but it has no basis in constitutional law. The doctrine of delegated/enumerated powers only applies to the federal government, but the Ninth, whatever the hell it does, presumably applies to the states, as well.
January 5th, 2006 at 11:57 pm
I agree. The 14th Amendment does apply the Bill of Rights and other amendments like the 15th one for the right to vote to the states. But back to the subject of the original post, just look how grossly states and local governments infringe on the 2nd Amendment and so obviously governments, both federal and state, are renegades and lawless.
My preference for the Bill of Rights to be “declarative” of the rights of the people and “restrictive” of government power is precisely Constitutional IF the wording of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights is followed, but it is obviously being violated as exampled by the many infringements on the RBKA!
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government
are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are
numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external
objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the
power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to
the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary
course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and
the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.” –James
Madison, Federalist Paper #45
“The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie
the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not
become the legalized version of the first.”–Thomas Jefferson
“I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That
‘all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people.’
–Thomas Jefferson
“Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have
perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted,
bastardized form of illegitimate government.”
-James Madison
“Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits
drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits
of the law’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it
violates the rights of the individual.”
-Thomas Jefferson