To help us look for better answers (guns)

[Truth in love]

“No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.“
— Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)


lets stop trying to make bad laws and start a civil war. Let’s work on a lawful solution to people being killed.

 

[Lyndon]

your stupid constitution was written by slave owning mysogynists, it is one of the more backward constitutions used by countries around the world, its outdated and nonsensical in its application, and stupid Americans think it makes them superior.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

“No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.“
— Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)


lets stop trying to make bad laws and start a civil war. Let’s work on a lawful solution to people being killed.

Make all killing lawful. That is one solution.

You can't make a solution without listen to both sides and find compromises. If it is not a compromise, one side will consider it a bad law and start a civil war.
What that is in practice, is something else.

 

[Polymath257]

“No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.“
— Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)


lets stop trying to make bad laws and start a civil war. Let’s work on a lawful solution to people being killed.

And the Constitution can be amended. And whether a law is Constitutional or not is determined by the Supreme Court, whose composition and interpretation can change over time.

So, right now, abortion is a right under the Constitution. It looks like that interpretation may change soon.

Maybe we need to go back to an older interpretation of the 2nd amendment?

 

[Truth in love]

So because some judges can imagine that a right exists they can imagine that one does not? This would not be the rule of law.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

So because some judges can imagine that a right exists they can imagine that one does not? This would not be the rule of law.

But is rule of law. Law is made by how we think and judge behavior.

 

[Truth in love]

Okay America 101
We have a constitution. It supersedes other laws nationally or locally. In the Constitution as amended we the people have aright to arms among several others. The government is expressly forbidden from messing with that right. Anything other than a constitutional amendment would be unlawful. And frankly a deceleration of war on the law abiding citizen of the land.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Okay America 101
We have a constitution. It supersedes other laws nationally or locally. In the Constitution as amended we the people have aright to arms among several others. The government is expressly forbidden from messing with that right. Anything other than a constitutional amendment would be unlawful. And frankly a deceleration of war on the law abiding citizen of the land.

You didn't have that right before 2008. Learn your history.

 

[F1fan]

“No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.“
— Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)


lets stop trying to make bad laws and start a civil war. Let’s work on a lawful solution to people being killed.

Start a civil war? Are you suggesting gun fanatics would prefer to start a civil war rather than acknowledge and follow new gun regulations? If so, you offer us an excellent reason to not treat these people as "law abiding citizens" nor trusted as our neighbors.

 

[Truth in love]

your stupid constitution was written by slave owning mysogynists, it is one of the more backward constitutions used by countries around the world, its outdated and nonsensical in its application, and stupid Americans think it makes them superior.

So at least your open about your hate and bigotry.

 

[Revoltingest]

You didn't have that right before 2008. Learn your history.

What do you think happened in 2008?
Elaborating would be a good start...better
than telling someone to learn their history.
(Just in case you might be wrong.)

 

[Revoltingest]

So at least your open about your hate and bigotry.

Well, if the country's founders had sins, then the
Constitution shouldn't be the basis for law, eh.
Any rights can be waived by fiat by legislators.

 

[Truth in love]

You didn't have that right before 2008. Learn your history.

Wow the right exist because mankind exists. The federal government does to degree abuse its citizens and to try to deprive them of their rights. The evils of slavery did not mean that a person who was a slave did not have a right to freedom. The government abused them and denied them their rights.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

What do you think happened in 2008?
Elaborating would be a good start...better
than telling someone to learn their history.
(Just in case you might be wrong.)

Well, google "2008 2nd amendment".

 

[viole]

“No one Is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.“
— Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)


lets stop trying to make bad laws and start a civil war. Let’s work on a lawful solution to people being killed.

I strongly suggest you do like in Switzerland. Every part of the constitution can be changed if people vote for the change. And it changes all the time, since we vote for changing it a few times a year.

which is a good idea. Who wants a constitution reflecting the values available in 1291 CE?
or 1776 or something, in your case?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Truth in love]

Well, if the country's founders had sins, then the
Constitution shouldn't be the basis for law, eh.

"I called that guy a jerk therefore everything he ever said and did is wrong. Never mind he radical change in personal liberty, rights for women, ending slavery etc. a jerk is always bad" LOL the raging cognitive distortions in that mind set are off the chart.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, google "2008 2nd amendment".

You made the claim.
It's your job, not mine to support it.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Wow the right exist because mankind exists. The federal government does to degree abuse its citizens and to try to deprive them of their rights. The evils of slavery did not mean that a person who was a slave did not have a right to freedom. The government abused them and denied them their rights.

Well, it is a different interpretant of 2nd and thereby it changed whether it was a right. And that change was done by the government, in this case the SC.

 

[F1fan]

So because some judges can imagine that a right exists they can imagine that one does not? This would not be the rule of law.

Then who settles it?

Are you not aware that Congress can make laws? The SC can invalidate a law if it interprets the constitution a certain way. It's all quite fluid. But the primary point of laws and rights is to make society safe and stable for citizens. The issue of prevalent guns is more and more a huge threat to safety and stability. It is apparent that access to guns needs better regulation. I suggest an application process, waiting periods, and mental heath screenings.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

You made the claim.
It's your job, not mine to support it.

Well, I don't care that you don't know your history. So if you believe I am wrong, that is only a belief in all cases.