Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Article III. Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office. Section. 2.
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States;— between a State and Citizens of another State,—between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed. Section. 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.
Here is the interpretation doctrine right from the horses mouth.
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"-These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.
there it is..........you may not like it.......but there it is.
It will take a whole lot of word salad to get around that.
Here's what Obama, the constitutional law expert said yesterday:
" I believe in the Second Amendment. It is there, written on the paper. It guarantees a right to bear arms. No matter how many times people try to twist my words around -- I taught constitutional law, I know a little bit about this -- I get it."
At coffee this morning a couple of the liberals in our group were shocked he admitted this and included it in the speech, as there are still those who don't believe it's our right.
True. Easy to read, easy to understand but very, very difficult to interpret the meaning as is demonstrated by this very thread.
That's why the founding fathers, in their magnificent understanding of human nature and the duplicity therein, devised a Supreme Court composed of the brightest legal scholars and judges the nation could produce to be the final arbiters of What, exactly the constitution means.
The founders said, in effect, "The constitutional buck stops at the Supreme court". "What they say is final." Otherwise the argument of what "is" actually "Is" would go on forever.
The Supreme Court has ruled In Heller vs. DC. that the 2nd amendment confirms an individual right to possess and use firearms. Furthermore, the ownership and use of firearms are subject to reasonable restrictions.
Period!........end of story........The buck has stopped.
Those who pick a single phrase and hang their entire constitutional hat on it are flat out wrong. the 2nd amendment must be read as the whole and The Supreme Court has interpreted the meaning according to the dictates of the founding fathers.
The 2nd absolutists would convince you that any restrictions, anywhere, anytime, for any reason, for any type of firearm whatsoever, is contrary to the meaning of the 2nd and if they had sway, all gun law currently on the books would be repealed as unconstitutional.
This is what they're selling.
Actually, no place in the constitution does the document grant authority to the SCOTUS to decide constitutionality. That power was grabbed by the SCOTUS in Marbury v Madison.
Heller vs. DC was not as sweeping as you describe. The decision applies to Washington DC and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends to the states, who can pass their own laws.
Actually, no place in the constitution does the document grant authority to the SCOTUS to decide constitutionality. That power was grabbed by the SCOTUS in Marbury v Madison.
Heller vs. DC was not as sweeping as you describe. The decision applies to Washington DC and protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends to the states, who can pass their own laws.
Let's ask an expert on constitutional law:
"I believe in the Second Amendment. It is there, written on the paper. It guarantees a right to bear arms. No matter how many times people try to twist my words around -- I taught constitutional law, I know a little bit about this -- I get it."
That is EXACTLY what the guys occupying Federal Land in Oregon are saying. Stay tuned to see how things turn out for them, it might be instructive. For that matter, go to NYC or NJ and wave a gun around when someone threatens you. See how things go for you. Those to whom the 2nd Amendment is important are NOT the majority of the population. For the moment the tide of opinion favors supporters of the second. If that changes, it will not require a repeal of it to effectively accomplish a complete re-design of gun culture in America. The 2nd is not what is allowing the present carnage.
Our founders, signers of the Constitution and those that fought in the revolution to free us from a tyrannical government, used what is now called the 2nd amendment to fight tyranny.
Just allowing a government to exist, the founders knew full well power is addicting and the government would eventually try to break the Bill of Rights to enslave the people once again.
The very thing that made our freedom from tyranny happen was also place strategically and worded so it could never be removed, into the document to preserve it, meaning an overbearing tyrannical government could die by the peoples arms, as easy as the people, who are free, allow government to exist.
That is the reason any law that involves arms, is unconstitutional... PERIOD.
Government has no say in the arms we make, distribute, keep or carry, unless their goal and intent is oppressive enslavement of the people by trashing the Constitution.
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Seems pretty cut and dry to me. I don't know why people think every private citizen has a right to own firearms free of regulation, education and other protective measures.
Because it just define we the people as the armed militia.
The door swings both ways on those writings. We can have a contest and each put up a writing from Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, et. al. And for every writing that claims totally unrestricted firearm rights to citizens, there are writings defending reasonable restrictions. the founder's private writings on the subject are mixed, at best.
And then you have what is actually written.... and signed. Making it a legal document.
The right of the people to keep & bear arms, shall never be infringed.
Define the following:
Militia -
Free State -
People -
to keep -
Bear arms -
Shall not -
Infringed -
What interpretation do you need, but a frigg'n dictionary.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
