Bill of Rights

Discussion in 'US Constitution' started by vasuderatorrent, Jan 5, 2019.

  1. TNHarley
    Online

    TNHarley Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2012
    Messages:
    63,926
    Thanks Received:
    9,441
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +65,392
    There isnt one. However there isnt a law that states citizens cant own one.
    The problem, which would make it inpossible to own is, the govt owns all fissile materials
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Porter Rockwell
    Offline

    Porter Rockwell VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,315
    Thanks Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Ratings:
    +1,083
    I wish an easy answer existed. The Constitution gives the United States Supreme Court the power to interpret the Constitution. HOWEVER, what the United States Supreme Court did was to set itself above the other branches of government, declaring itself the final arbiter of what the law is. That was unconstitutional. We, the people, are the de jure arbiters of what the law is.

    Then the High Court began reinterpreting their own decisions. So, while the earliest court decisions interpreted the Constitution consistent with the intent of the founding fathers, the United States Supreme Court strays to the left with each subsequent reinterpretation. Today, on many issues, especially the Second Amendment, the United States Supreme Court has changed the law 180 degrees opposite of what the founders intended.

    REGARDLESS of how the courts rule or what statutes change, the real key is to know what your unalienable Rights are and to never surrender or compromise them. It should not matter what kind of government the masses put into place. Unalienable Rights are non-negotiable.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  3. Blues Man
    Offline

    Blues Man Gold Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2016
    Messages:
    4,444
    Thanks Received:
    442
    Trophy Points:
    160
    Ratings:
    +2,397
    So you speak for all Americans

    What if Americans believed in slavery again?

    Segregation?

    One of the major reasons of legal protection of rights is so the mob can't take them away
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  4. whoisit
    Offline

    whoisit VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Thanks Received:
    122
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +411

    I agree it DOES allow for us to be as armed as the government but in this salad bowl of fruits and nuts it is scary to even think of some loose nut with a nuke. :ack-1::banana2::blowup:
     
  5. whoisit
    Offline

    whoisit VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Thanks Received:
    122
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +411
    Ruling from the bench is par for the course now. Our judges have turned into dictators. They no longer use constitutional law.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. anynameyouwish
    Online

    anynameyouwish Silver Member

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2018
    Messages:
    2,794
    Thanks Received:
    294
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Ratings:
    +1,812
    "I think all Americans agree that you shouldn't own nuclear weapons, cops should capture drunk drivers and people should answer cops questions"

    Go ahead and tell any conservative that he can't have a nuclear bomb and he will pull out his copy of the constitution and DEMAND that you show him WHERE in the constitution it says that!


    When it comes to rights and the constitution cons operate from 2 directions;

    if they want to do something and the law says "no" they will say "where in the constitution does it say that I can NOT do that"

    but when a sane and rational person wants to do something and a con is opposed to it he will say "where in the constitution does it say you CAN do that?"....

    see the diff?

    they can do what ever they want to because the constitution does NOT forbid it!

    everyone else can't do what they want because the constitution doesn't ALLOW it!

    pretty clever of them.....

    tobacco and pot might be good examples;

    they can smoke tobacco because the constitution doesn't say they can't.
    you can't smoke pot because the constitution doesn't say you can.
     
  7. M14 Shooter
    Offline

    M14 Shooter The Light of Truth

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Messages:
    24,786
    Thanks Received:
    2,305
    Trophy Points:
    275
    Location:
    Where I can see you, but you can't see me
    Ratings:
    +7,435
    This is a statement of ignorance or dishonesty - the number of conservatives that think this approaches statistical zero.
    Another absurd and unsupportable proposition.
    This is a perfectly reasonable question. You disagree?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. whoisit
    Offline

    whoisit VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2016
    Messages:
    771
    Thanks Received:
    122
    Trophy Points:
    80
    Ratings:
    +411
    I'm sure no same person would want a nuke but the intentions at the time was to have a citizenry strong enough to stop the government from abusing their powers over the people.
    At the time guess they didn't realize just how dangerous weapons could become .
     
  9. Porter Rockwell
    Offline

    Porter Rockwell VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,315
    Thanks Received:
    144
    Trophy Points:
    75
    Ratings:
    +1,083
    They should be. Clear cut violation of the Constitution since a fishing expedition without probable cause is not reasonable.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. vasuderatorrent
    Offline

    vasuderatorrent VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2015
    Messages:
    4,160
    Thanks Received:
    217
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +1,060
    Lots of organizations own nukes. They have only been used twice. I am not sure why that is. Nobody uses them. I am not complaining. I just think a product that has only been used twice would normally become obsolete but they keep making those things. I don' think a loose nut with a nuke is a threat. It does seems scary but history tells me that isn't a concern.
     

Share This Page