Replies

Of course not. If one wants to make a case for legalizing drugs based on the 9th or 14th amendment, be my guest.

But that's not what the author of the article was doing, was it? He was attempting to compare drug freedom with gun freedom, a right specifically protected by the 2nd amendment.

Drugs were not given such an amendment. And, if the 9th and 14th amendments say so much about protecting the freedoms you so copiously listed, why list guns separately? Surely if one is free to burp, fart, and buy a car, why not guns?

Comparing the freedom to do drugs with the Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, elevates drug use to a level it does not deserve.

Comparing the freedom to do drugs with the Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, elevates drug use to a level it does not deserve.

And it discredits the right to keep and bear arms. Not that they care.

You said, "The 9th and 14th say nothing about drugs being legal." And I took you to say that a right is not a right unless it's enumerated.

In this post, you say having to enumerate is silly. I agree. I really wasn't addressing the article at all, just your statement.

So, then, now you're saying that because the firearm weapon is considered so important it has an amendment to itself, other rights not specifically mentioned can be abrogated by the state?
The 2nd says everything about guns being legal. I repeat, no connection.

If one wants to make a case for legalizing drugs based on the 9th or 14th amendment, be my guest. But that's not what the author of the article was doing, was it? He was attempting to compare drug freedom with gun freedom, a right specifically protected by the 2nd amendment.

And a good job he did, which you have been unable refute. Specific enumeration of our rights is not needed. -- Read the 9th or the 14th for proof.

Drugs were not given such an amendment. And, if the 9th and 14th amendments say so much about protecting the freedoms you so copiously listed, why list guns separately?

Answered previously, - and again, you were unable to refute.

Comparing the freedom to do drugs with the Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms, elevates drug use to a level it does not deserve.
89 -robertpaulsen-

And it discredits the right to keep and bear arms. Not that they care. 92 -roscoe-

Typically inane comment roscoe. --- Why does comparing violated rights 'discredit' either one of them?

That was a argument many founders had against the Bill of Rights, they were afraid that if any rights were listed, than sooner or later only those listed would be considered protected. Guess what,they were right. Thank God that the Bill of Rights is there, or some would be arguing that we have NO RIGHTS, except what the govt was willing to extend to us. Subject to change, of course.