Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tpaine
"I don't think they've ever made a ruling based on the Ninth. The 14th did not apply it to the states..."

"First you say that "the 14th Amendment was expressly written to extend the Second to the states", then you claim "the 14th did not apply it to the states"... "


Flagrant stupidity and/or dishonesty is just not amusing. It gets one treated like a fool or, probably best, ignored.

663 posted on 02/12/2004 11:31:26 AM PST by mrsmith ("Oyez, oyez! All rise for the Honorable Chief Justice... Hillary Rodham Clinton ")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 657 | View Replies ]


To: mrsmith
At #387 mrsmith wrote:

"Frankly I do not understand why people wish to rewrite the Constitution over this. The 14th Amendment was expressly written to extend the Second to the states anyway."

At #611 mrsmith wrote:
I have just the opposite situation: the people I have been discussing with seem to read the Second Amendment without considering the 10th's rule of construction.
You can find many rulings by the Supremes based on the 10th. I don't think they've ever made a ruling based on the Ninth. The 14th did not apply it to the states- it is still a limit only on the feds. They often threaten to apply it to the states though in their dicta.

"First you say that "the 14th Amendment was expressly written to extend the Second to the states", then you claim "the 14th did not apply it to the states"... "

Flagrant stupidity and/or dishonesty is just not amusing. It gets one treated like a fool or, probably best, ignored.

Your two statements contradict each other..
Your effort to claim they do not are foolish, -- perhaps dishonest.

Which brings us back to my questions:

Which way would you have it?
And frankly I do not understand why you say states have the power to control our RKBA's. Can you explain?
How can you justify CA's ability to prohibit 'assault weapons'?

I suspect you cannot answer, & that's why you set up the "ignore" diversion --- , true?

664 posted on 02/12/2004 12:40:23 PM PST by tpaine (I'm trying to be 'Mr Nice Guy', but the U.S. Constitution defines conservatism; - not the GOP. .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson