USSC to take Chicago case on 2A incorporation

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • john_bud

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 23, 2009
    2,045
    I will not.



    How about a literal reading of "Life, Liberty and Happiness"? In other words you have a Constitutional Right to receive:

    - Life: Free Health Care
    - Liberty: Guns, Drugs and Rock and Roll
    - Happiness: You need money to be happy. So everyone has an option to go on the government dole.

    Don't laugh. Other nations do this, except for the gun part.


    You forget that liberals reading it literally will EXCLUDE guns as they could get rid of the life part. And while you have the right liberty and happiness, liberals don't feel you have the right to salt, saturated fats, hunting, fishing, boating, 4 wheeling, RV's, smoking, chewing tobacco or any other non-PC thing. But it's ok to smoke dope, shoot up drugs, etc.:sad20:
     

    Boxcab

    MSI EM
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 22, 2007
    7,917
    AA County
    Is not the wording such that you have a right to "pursue" life liberty and happiness, not the Right to "be given" the same?
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    Is not the wording such that you have a right to "pursue" life liberty and happiness, not the Right to "be given" the same?

    Actually, neither. I was paraphrasing a popular term. The real text says "life, liberty and property."

    Section 1 of 14th Amendment said:
    "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. 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; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    Kinda wish it was "pursuit of happiness". Property is much more ominous in the context of you having "Rights" to property. At least the way many think these days in terms of entitlement.
     

    Boxcab

    MSI EM
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 22, 2007
    7,917
    AA County
    Thanks Patrick.

    I can rephrase as:

    You shall not be "deprived" of life, liberty or property, not that you shall be "given" these things.

    How about a literal reading of "Life, Liberty and Happiness"? In other words you have a Constitutional Right to receive:

    - Life: Free Health Care
    - Liberty: Guns, Drugs and Rock and Roll
    - Happiness: You need money to be happy. So everyone has an option to go on the government dole.

    You have the right to free health care if you can find it, but you do not have a right that forces me to provide you with free health care.

    You have a right to have guns (drugs and rock-n-roll), but you do not have the right to force me to provide them to you.

    You have the right to earn money for your own happiness, but you do not have the right to force me to provide money for your happiness.

    Thus, when the Constitution is read as written, I think P&I would be the way to go for All of our Rights.

    Just my 2 uneducated cents.

    -Boxcab

    The above "you"'s are generic and not intended for any individual.
     

    ezliving

    Besieger
    Oct 9, 2008
    4,590
    Undisclosed Secure Location
    Since DC is still doing everything they can to thwart 2nd Amendment rights, despite Heller, and Chicago is moving towards doing the same thing, assuming they lose McDonald, it would be a wise SCOTUS that decided PoI with strict scrutiny.

    The originalist view of the Constitution is not respected by the anti-gun rights nuts and the SCOTUS knows it. I hope the Justices don't like being ignored and circumvented. Hammer Time.
     

    Patrick

    MSI Executive Member
    Apr 26, 2009
    7,725
    Calvert County
    Thanks Patrick.

    I can rephrase as:

    You shall not be "deprived" of life, liberty or property, not that you shall be "given" these things.



    You have the right to free health care if you can find it, but you do not have a right that forces me to provide you with free health care.

    You have a right to have guns (drugs and rock-n-roll), but you do not have the right to force me to provide them to you.

    You have the right to earn money for your own happiness, but you do not have the right to force me to provide money for your happiness.

    Thus, when the Constitution is read as written, I think P&I would be the way to go for All of our Rights.

    Just my 2 uneducated cents.

    -Boxcab

    The above "you"'s are generic and not intended for any individual.

    Oh, I agree with the original intent of the 14th and PoI. The issue is that the 14th has been twisted and broken for 140 years -- PoI was gutted in Slaughterhouse; and Due Process has filled in the blanks originally intended for PoI.

    Many, many cases depend on the current interpretation, however flawed they might be. Nothing is more educational than to read the contortions the Court goes through to justify incorporation for any cause. Off the top of my head, the cases that most everybody knows that rely on the current theories: Miranda, Brown, Roe v Wade, Lawrence, Heller...several free-speech cases...McDonald (soon).

    You get the idea.

    Making a break now creates a metric butt-load (that is a lot, btw) of headaches for the Court. Forget about the future cases...the past is now open to (re)interpretation.

    And before the Conservatives among us get all happy that Roe and Lawrence could be victims of a re-invigorated PoI clause...keep in mind the reinterpretations there almost surely mean less intervention by the government. Meaning existing laws are even less likely to survive intact.

    The Roberts Court has made clear they are willing to shake some branches and set their own path. But I don't think they want to go that far.

    They know history, and history says they can make PoI as strict as the want today only to see it bent much later.

    But it would be fun to watch.
     

    shawn

    Active Member
    Oct 23, 2007
    708
    Actually, neither. I was paraphrasing a popular term. The real text says "life, liberty and property."



    Kinda wish it was "pursuit of happiness". Property is much more ominous in the context of you having "Rights" to property. At least the way many think these days in terms of entitlement.

    The "pursuit of happiness" text comes from the Declaration of Independence.

    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:innocent0, 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. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    275,584
    Messages
    7,287,339
    Members
    33,480
    Latest member
    navyfirefighter1981

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom