Author Topic: It’s Time For The Supreme Court To Make States Stop Ignoring The Second Amendment  (Read 12007 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Where does it expressly say that the bill of rights, or the second amendment, expressly applies to the states?

Check the signature block for the representatives of each state that ratified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Several states via their representatives to the Constitutional Convention said if the Second Amendment isn't in there....we won't ratify the Constitution.

The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Really?  So, how is it that a provision that, when written, applied ONLY to the federal government suddenly becomes applicable to the states?

The Second Amendment isn't for only the Federal Government.  Only gun grabbers like yourself believe that lie.

Quote
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Nothing in there about it being exclusive to the Federal Government.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Check the signature block for the representatives of each state that ratified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Several states via their representatives to the Constitutional Convention said if the Second Amendment isn't in there....we won't ratify the Constitution.



That’s nice.  But I prefer the Constitution itself. Where in the Constitution does it expressly say that the Second Amendment applies against the states?

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 80,223
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Check the signature block for the representatives of each state that ratified the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Several states via their representatives to the Constitutional Convention said if the Second Amendment isn't in there....we won't ratify the Constitution.

Leftists don't care what was written by the signers at the time the Constitution.  They are a bunch of dead, white guys.  What matters now is how the words of those dead guys can be twisted in court to fit modern leftist notions.
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
That’s nice.  But I prefer the Constitution itself. Where in the Constitution does it expressly say that the Second Amendment applies against the states?

14th Amendment:

Quote
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

There's also this thing in Article IV of the Constitution called the "Privileges or Immunities Clause ".  It protects against interstate discrimination with regard to "all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."

There's also  Corfield v. Coryell.


The answer to your question is out there.  Not hard to find.  Anti gunners like yourself just don't like the answer you get versus the one you WANT to hear.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
The Second Amendment isn't for only the Federal Government.  Only gun grabbers like yourself believe that lie.

Nothing in there about it being exclusive to the Federal Government.

Oh dearie.  And here I thought you knew something about the Constitution.  Or so you’ve always claimed. 

The Bill of Rights, of which the Second Amendment is a part, only bound the federal government when it was written.  See Barron v. Baltimore (1833).

It didn’t start to be applied to the states until the early 20th century, when it was selectively incorporated Amendment by Amendment, under the auras and emanations of the 14th Amendment’s due process clause. 

Hugo Black thought all the amendments should be mechanically incorporated under that provision, but he did not prevail.  Instead, Justice Frankfurter and his selective incorporation doctrine prevailed.  Under that doctrine, a right under one of the amendments is only incorporated if the court has decided that it is required under the general concept of due process - ie, it’s in there if its omission would shock the conscience of the court.  Rochin v. California (1952).

In other words, a provision of the bill of rights only applies if at least five justices declare themselves shocked that it’s not required by general due process principles.

That is, it’s an emanation or aura of the 14th Amendment.

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
14th Amendment:

There's also this thing in Article IV of the Constitution called the "Privileges or Immunities Clause ".  It protects against interstate discrimination with regard to "all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."

There's also  Corfield v. Coryell.


The answer to your question is out there.  Not hard to find.  Anti gunners like yourself just don't like the answer you get versus the one you WANT to hear.

Nope. 

And here I thought you actually knew something about the Constitution. 

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,773
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Total nonsense.  Application of the specific provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states is just as much the product of auras and emanations as Roe was. 

Funny how you like one aspect of judicial activism: incorporation of the Second Amendment via the auras and emanations of fourteenth Amendment due process, but not the recognition of a fundamental right to bodily freedom under the same auspices. 

Apparently, you’d rather more we’re born so you could shoot ‘em up yourself, and state law be damned.
You cite "bodily freedom". You have freedom over your body, until and unless you reach out and harm another without just cause. That 'fetus' is another body. It may be contained within the body of another, temporarily, but it is a genetically unique separate body. Where is the freedom for that one?
Your argument does not hold water.
As for this bit of shit:
Quote
Apparently, you’d rather more we’re born so you could shoot ‘em up yourself, and state law be damned.
You defile yourself with such emanations. Had you said this of me in person, my reaction would not be so gracious, and none would fault me for it.

We have state laws against murder, here.
We aren't getting the sanctimonious press the smug killers in the northern cities are busy aiming at the Southern States, trying to make distaste for killing human offspring into a southern 'hick' thing, but our state has made advancements in the restriction of the slaughter, too.

I, sir, am not the murderer, but rather one who seeks to stop the slaughter which has taken over 60 million innocent American lives already.

When the eugenicists get a little farther down the slippery slope, it is only a matter of time until it is your turn. Perhaps then your tone might change.
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Leftists don't care what was written by the signers at the time the Constitution.  They are a bunch of dead, white guys.  What matters now is how the words of those dead guys can be twisted in court to fit modern leftist notions.

So, wise guy, where are the words that expressly say the Second Amendment applies against the states?  Where is it written?

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Nope.

 *****rollingeyes***** 

Quote
And here I thought you actually knew something about the Constitution.

Clearly I know more about it than you do.  Otherwise you'd be showing case law and where exactly in the Constitution I've erred.

Instead you just play rope a dope and demand of others that you won't do yourself.

Typical small minded Progressive tactics.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
So, wise guy, where are the words that expressly say the Second Amendment applies against the states?  Where is it written?

You've been shown where.  And you dismissed it without even reading what's in the Constitution.

Time for you to show us where in the Constitution is says the Second Amendment does NOT apply to the states.

Put up or shut up.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 80,223
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
So, wise guy, where are the words that expressly say the Second Amendment applies against the states?  Where is it written?

Right next to where it says guns are only for Militias.
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
You've been shown where.  And you dismissed it without even reading what's in the Constitution.

Time for you to show us where in the Constitution is says the Second Amendment does NOT apply to the states.

Put up or shut up.

No, I haven’t been boy-o.  I’ve been shown the 14th Amendment, which nowhere expressly makes a statement about the Second Amendment. 

And I would think that even you realize that when it was enacted, the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government. 

In fact, when it was drafted, language that would have applied it to the states was deleted, so clearly it was not intended to apply to the states when it was drafted and ratified. 

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Right next to where it says guns are only for Militias.

Really?  So why didnt the entire Bill of Rights automatically apply to the states as of 1789?

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
*****rollingeyes***** 

Clearly I know more about it than you do.  Otherwise you'd be showing case law and where exactly in the Constitution I've erred.

Instead you just play rope a dope and demand of others that you won't do yourself.

Typical small minded Progressive tactics.
Clearly you do not because you don’t even have the faintest idea how it is that the various parts of the bill of rights came to be applied against the states. 

You don’t have a clue. 

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 80,223
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Really?  So why didnt the entire Bill of Rights automatically apply to the states as of 1789?

"Incorporation" happened.  You should be familiar with it, you tout it constantly for the other Amendments.  Only the Second Amendment is not to be enforced, according to what appears to be your view.
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Offline Jazzhead

  • Blue lives matter
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11,593
  • Gender: Male
"Incorporation" happened.  You should be familiar with it, you tout it constantly for the other Amendments.  Only the Second Amendment is not to be enforced, according to what appears to be your view.

The problem is that, in our partisan culture, the SCOTUS has become unwilling to step up and enforce the Constitution in the face of threats to its perceived "legitimacy".    Both the choice right and the individual gun right are subject to reasonable regulation - that the SCOTUS has acknowledged.   But the states have been pushing the envelope,  passing regulations that skirt closer and closer to crossing the line of "unreasonableness", whatever that means.   Well,  it's up to the SCOTUS to apply the brakes,  but it seems to have been effectively intimidated.   
It's crackers to slip a rozzer the dropsy in snide

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
"Incorporation" happened.  You should be familiar with it, you tout it constantly for the other Amendments.  Only the Second Amendment is not to be enforced, according to what appears to be your view.

No. That is not my view.  You would do well to stop assuming you know what someone’s view is and, if it’s germane to the conversation, ask them what their view is.  That way, you’ll spend less time making an ass out of u and me. 

And incorporation is not mechanical.  Justice Frankfurter and the Supreme Court have said as much.  Instead, a right is incorporated against the states under the general rubric of substantive due process if the Court finds that the absence of the right would “shock the conscience”.  See Rochin v. California. 

The Supreme Court applied that substantive due process approach to incorporating the Second Amendment against the states in McDonald v. Chicago. 

Which takes us back to my original point:  the route the Court used to apply the Second Amendment to the states - general substantive due process - is the same route the Court used to justify Roe v. Wade. 

Offline thackney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,267
  • Gender: Male
Where does it expressly say that the bill of rights, or the second amendment, expressly applies to the states?

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States
Life is fragile, handle with prayer

Offline thackney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,267
  • Gender: Male
Nope. 

And here I thought you actually knew something about the Constitution.

The incorporation doctrine is a constitutional doctrine through which the first ten amendments of the United States Constitution (known as the Bill of Rights) are made applicable to the states through the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Prior to the doctrine's (and the Fourteenth Amendment's) existence, the Bill of Rights applied only to the Federal Government and to federal court cases. States and state courts could choose to adopt similar laws, but were under no obligation to do so.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/incorporation_doctrine
Life is fragile, handle with prayer

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
Really?  So why didnt the entire Bill of Rights automatically apply to the states as of 1789?

Are you really this damn ignorant of history? 

Here let me educate you.

U.S. Constitution - Ratified 21 June 1788.  Effective 4 July 1789

Bill of Rights - Created 25 September 1789.  Ratified 15 December 1791.


Cant have something apply that hadn't been finalized or ratified by 2/3rds of the states.  The drafting and approval process for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were two separate tasks. 

The Bill of Rights was written to address the objections raised by Anti-Federalists over some flaws they saw in the way the Constitution in it's approved form had ben written.



The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Offline txradioguy

  • Propaganda NCOIC
  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,534
  • Gender: Male
  • Rule #39
"Incorporation" happened.  You should be familiar with it, you tout it constantly for the other Amendments.  Only the Second Amendment is not to be enforced, according to what appears to be your view.

@Cyber Liberty he's actually asking us to answer a question that is truly ignorant on his part.  Especially if you know anything about history.
The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.

Here lies in honored glory an American soldier, known but to God

THE ESTABLISHMENT IS THE PROBLEM...NOT THE SOLUTION

Republicans Don't Need A Back Bench...They Need a BACKBONE!

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
Are you really this damn ignorant of history? 

Here let me educate you.

U.S. Constitution - Ratified 21 June 1788.  Effective 4 July 1789

Bill of Rights - Created 25 September 1789.  Ratified 15 December 1791.


Cant have something apply that hadn't been finalized or ratified by 2/3rds of the states.  The drafting and approval process for the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were two separate tasks. 

The Bill of Rights was written to address the objections raised by Anti-Federalists over some flaws they saw in the way the Constitution in it's approved form had ben written.





Bravo!

And the Bill of Rights only limited the federal government when it was ratified.  It was not made applicable to the States until the beginning of the 1900s, when the Supreme Court began to selectively incorporate its provisions under the rubric of substantive due process.

Since you obviously have a browser handy, why don’t you surf on over to Wikipedia and look up the article on the incorporation of the bill of rights.  You’ll find a discussion of the background, including that it initially did not apply to the states, and citations to the case law for the cases in which the Court eventually began incorporating it against the states. 

In fact, you’ll even find discussion of the point that, for at least 20 years after the 14th Amendment was ratified, the Court actually refused to apply the Bill of Rights against the states. 

Geez!

Bill Cipher

  • Guest
@Cyber Liberty he's actually asking us to answer a question that is truly ignorant on his part.  Especially if you know anything about history.

Which you painfully know nothing of. 

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 80,223
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
Which takes us back to my original point:  the route the Court used to apply the Second Amendment to the states - general substantive due process - is the same route the Court used to justify Roe v. Wade.

In that case, you should be every bit as supportive the Right to Keep and Bear Arms as you are of Roe.   Are you?
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed: