Former Supreme Court justice: ‘Repeal the Second Amendment’

[INVAR]

There are two kinds of Constitutional rights - enumerated rights and rights created by the interpretation of the Constitution by judges. 

And right there, is the express evidence that you are overt enemy of both the Constitution and our liberties.

As you have been told and routinely ignore and attempt to argue otherwise - our Rights do not come from the Constitution, enumerated or by grant of a judge in a black robe.

[Jazzhead]

Despite your insistence that such a move is not abolishing a Right into a Government-granted privilege - you just revealed the bullshit of your own statement.  Because unless one complies with the above and is approved by the state, one cannot exercise the keeping or bearing of arms per your own advocacy.  Which, as I have told you before - amounts to the abolition of an inalienable right, into a grant and privilege from Government.

Your stupid ideas are the very definition of alienating us from our rights.  Which makes you an enemy of the Constitution and liberty itself.

Just get it through your thick-fascist skull that we will not comply with such bullshit if your advocacy for such tyranny gets enacted by your government.

We will resist you and anyone attempting to impose it.

And if you think it's "masturbatory fantasy' that we are going to resist people like you, test us and find out.

Go ahead.

We know where your advice leads, and we have no intention of allowing that to happen without a fight.

The smaller the penis, the bigger the gun.   

[Jazzhead]

our Rights do not come from the Constitution

The protection of your rights from the government sure as hell does.   You think God gives a damn about your rights? 

[Frank Cannon]

The smaller the penis, the bigger the gun.   

Is that why you are a big Dick?

[LMAO]

They can try, but I will not comply.  I'd sick of arguing about with with someone who ignores my points, so I'm just taking @INVAR's stand and resolutely say, "I will not comply."  Period.  End of paragraph.  I asked if we have any rights at all not granted by SCOTUS and there's been no reply.

There will be mass non-compliance.  There are probably more than 300 Million firearms in this country, and if they try to even register them they'll sweep up maybe 1 Million.  Maybe.

And this is probably why, despite rhetoric and demands for such, we may never have gun registration and/or confiscation. It would be a bureaucratic nightmare and enforcement would be impossible due to non compliance and it's doubtful most Americans would accept an iron fisted police state against their fellow citizens.

@Cyber Liberty

[Cyber Liberty]

There are two kinds of Constitutional rights - enumerated rights and rights created by the interpretation of the Constitution by judges.  They are both valid, but the latter is much more fragile to the vagaries of politics. 

The Constitution explicitly provides for freedom of speech and the free exercise of religion.  It does not explicitly provide for a right to privacy (that is, the right to be free from the government intruding without consent on one's privacy).   Yet that right was deemed by a SCOTUS majority to be among the natural rights protected by the Constitution,  and undergirds the right to choose whether or not to procreate. 

That right, for better or worse,  hangs in the balance of 5 - 4 SCOTUS majority.   And millions of us have become single issue voters,  concerned with electing politicians who will appoint judges who will overturn or confirm the Constitution's right to abortion.   

The INDIVIDUAL gun right likewise hangs in the balance of a 5 - 4 SCOTUS majority.   And likewise there is a political movement to elect politicians who will appoint judges to deny the right.   I've said for years that the proper reaction to Roe v. Wade is for the People to act and either codify it or amend the Constitution to provide fetuses with the rights of citizens.   I support the same approach with respect to Heller -  to secure the right,  turn to the People to codify it. 

 

So the only way the right to keep and bear arms could be an "enumerated right" would be if a court had never decided on it, or maybe if a court (or "super legislature) decided on it by a huge majority vote.  Nice. Newsflash:  Natural rights, like the right of self protection, cannot be voted away, even by a group of nine robed tyrants.

"I will not comply."

[INVAR]

The protection of your rights from the government sure as hell does. 

And our guns provide us and our rights protection from people like you who empower government to 'reasonably regulate, license and register' with them for the privilege of exercising them.

You think God gives a damn about your rights?

Spoken just like Satan himself.  I'm sure you're going to tell us next that He doesn't and that the Founders were full of crap when they wrote that liberty was a gift from Him.

[Cyber Liberty]

The protection of your rights from the government sure as hell does.   You think God gives a damn about your rights?

You just steered off the road, crashed through the guardrail and drove straight over the cliff.

[Polly Ticks]

You just steered off the road, crashed through the guardrail and drove straight over the cliff.

No worries!  @Jazzhead has INSURANCE for his car!   

[EdJames]

Oh cut it out.  I'm not an "anti-gun bigot" with "liberal bias';  I represent a perfectly mainstream position - preserve the RKBA,  but give law enforcement the tools to assign guns to persons legally responsible for them.   Just as we are all perfectly comfortable with when it comes to cars.

And I am concerned that the entire individual gun right is on very shakey Constitutional ground.  You don't like that message, so you attack the messenger.  But the individual gun right is as fragile as the abortion right, and the Dems are prioritizing the need to appoint judges who will overturn Heller.   

It is time to stop fighting the last war (or even sillier, to engage like INVAR in masturbatory fantasies about armed insurrection), and realize that an amendment of the Second Amendment is essential to secure the individual RKBA.   Yes, that's my opinion and you will attack me for it.  But check back in five years after the Dems again control the Presidency and Congress.   
 

It is hideously grotesque for you to equate these in any way!

The former being a natural right bestowed upon mankind by its Creator, and the latter being state sanctioned murder created out of whole cloth by a renegade court!!

Are you not thinking straight?

[INVAR]

Are you not thinking straight?

I don't find many Leftists who think at all, much less straight.

[Jazzhead]

So the only way the right to keep and bear arms could be an "enumerated right" would be if a court had never decided on it, or maybe if a court (or "super legislature) decided on it by a huge majority vote.

The 2A DOES represent an enumerated right, but the presence of the predicate clause means that it took the Heller opinion to confirm that the Constitution's protection applies to the individual RKBA.   As I've said many times, I agree with Heller.   But I also recognize that another SCOTUS could overturn that decision, on the basis of the predicate clause.  It is time to fix that.   

[Jazzhead]

Newsflash:  Natural rights, like the right of self protection, cannot be voted away, even by a group of nine robed tyrants.

You miss the point.  What can be voted away is PROTECTION of your natural rights.   The 2A is defective.   It needs to be fixed.

[EdJames]

I don't find many Leftists who think at all, much less straight.

If not from (malformed) thought I can not understand where such an abomination arises from?

[roamer_1]

The protection of your rights from the government sure as hell does.   You think God gives a damn about your rights?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

[EdJames]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Amen!

[Jazzhead]

It is hideously grotesque for you to equate these in any way!

The former being a natural right bestowed upon mankind by its Creator, and the latter being state sanctioned murder created out of whole cloth by a renegade court!!

Are you not thinking straight?

The natural, God-given right is the right to privacy and self-determination.  Do you believe abortion is wrong? Newsflash - so do I.  But the State cannot compel a woman to reproduce.   That is a violation of her natural rights.   

[INVAR]

If not from (malformed) thought I can not understand where such an abomination arises from?

He gave us a clue from whom such an abomination of thought comes from in Post 160.

[Cyber Liberty]

The 2A DOES represent an enumerated right, but the presence of the predicate clause means that it took the Heller opinion to confirm that the Constitution's protection applies to the individual RKBA.   As I've said many times, I agree with Heller.   But I also recognize that another SCOTUS could overturn that decision, on the basis of the predicate clause.  It is time to fix that.   

If it can be twisted by lawyers and Judges, then it is not a right at all.  Dress it up with "Predicate Clause" all you like, "I will not comply."  There, I fixed it.

Because the right to protect myself, among others, come from God (as the founders had declared), and not a piece of parchment, then I don't care how many clauses can be teased from the words of a law, I will not comply.

[Jazzhead]

That idea doesn't appeal to me, but the original term of 'assigning' made it sound as if they would determine what type you could own.  I appreciate the clarification.

As far as I am concerned, as long as you're licensed and register them (and don't use them to commit crimes), you can own as many kinds of guns as you like.

[EdJames]

The natural, God-given right is the right to privacy and self-determination.  Do you believe abortion is wrong? Newsflash - so do I.  But the State cannot compel a woman to reproduce.   That is a violation of her natural rights.

Balderdash!  That hogwash is the line of thinking that led that renegade court astray!!  Surely you can't afford it any credence!

[Jazzhead]

Because the right to protect myself, among others, come from God (as the founders had declared), and not a piece of parchment

You miss the point.  God doesn't protect your rights.  The Constitution - that piece of parchment - does.   

[EdJames]

He gave us a clue from whom such an abomination of thought comes from in Post 160.

If he is fool enough to deny the existence of our Creator, is he also fool enough to misunderstand the nature of humanity?

[Jazzhead]

Balderdash!  That hogwash is the line of thinking that led that renegade court astray!!  Surely you can't afford it any credence!

Why should the State force a woman to reproduce?   Why don't you make the moral case against abortion and let her decide for herself?   

[INVAR]

The natural, God-given right is the right to privacy and self-determination. 

And yet, you constantly argue that life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the mechanisms of self defense and private property are somehow the privilege and grant of government to license, reasonably regulate and restrict if not abolish.

It goes to figure the only thing you consider God-given is a right for someone to have sex with whatever or whomever and call it marriage while killing the consequence of normal sex so as not to force a woman to reproduce.

You truly are a transformation into an angel of light.