Which is the most valuable to protect?

What needs the most protection?

  • Money

  • Politicians

  • Children

  • Jewelry

Results are only viewable after voting.
A

ActionianJacksonian

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
Bye bye America, states rights before basic human rights and they are required to consider treaties the US signed like the UN human rights charter as well as the constitution. However the UN did not exist in the founders time, neither did repeating fire arms, just black powder back then too. The 2nd was for military purposes and said arms, not guns and back then that included cannon, rockets, bombs and grenades too, not just guns, guns are not mentioned in the 2nd.

Ya kinda see how the line of federalist society logic goes?
Click to expand...
Cell phones, computers, the internet, television, none of these existed at The Founding.

Yet here you are enjoying free speech protected on those things. Imagine that.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
ActionianJacksonian said:
Cell phones, computers, the internet, television, none of these existed at The Founding.

Yet here you are enjoying free speech protected on those things. Imagine that.
Click to expand...
Wait until they get around to overturning those precedents too. The judicial "philosophy" is originalist, the intentions of the founders and states rights are supreme with this bunch. Interestingly the federal government heavily regulated radio, TV and phones, but not the press. They need to do the same thing again with increased FCC powers, broadcasters have an obligation of public service, not spreading bullshit that kills hundreds of thousands like Trump and foxnews did with covid. But I suppose with this bunch broadcasting will end up a state's right too.

The idea with conservative judges is to strictly follow the founders original intent and ignore social justice. It turns the law into an algorithm that lawyers can game and removes judgement from judges. It turns the US constitution into a dead document that fails to address the changes in society and the world, instead of living document that meets the needs of modern citizens. They overturned 50 years of precedent to overturn Row, lied to congress and mislead them about the issue to gain their appointments. If the democrats win they will hold impeachment hearings to soften them up before packing the court. It was just another way to hold onto power after their best before date expired.
 
bam0813

bam0813

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
Bye bye America, states rights before basic human rights and they are required to consider treaties the US signed like the UN human rights charter as well as the constitution. However the UN did not exist in the founders time, neither did repeating fire arms, just black powder back then too. The 2nd was for military purposes and said arms, not guns and back then that included cannon, rockets, bombs and grenades too, not just guns, guns are not mentioned in the 2nd.

Ya kinda see how the line of federalist society logic goes?
Click to expand...
If that were true where were the restrictions on the civilians. They didnt have cannons because they didnt have a Sams club offering them for sale. Do you really think guns as you say are not arms? Lol they are literally called firearms. Guns were cannons. Ever hear some say nice firecannon or this firegrenade is a collectible
 
PJ Diaz

PJ Diaz

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
The idea with conservative judges is to strictly follow the founders original intent and ignore social justice. It turns the law into an algorithm that lawyers can game and removes judgement from judges. It turns the US constitution into a dead document that fails to address the changes in society and the world, instead of living document that meets the needs of modern citizens. They overturned 50 years of precedent to overturn Row, lied to congress and mislead them about the issue to gain their appointments. If the democrats win they will hold impeachment hearings to soften them up before packing the court. It was just another way to hold onto power after their best before date expired.
Click to expand...
Right, because that's the job of judges; to interpret the law, not re-write the law. It's the job of elected officials to write/re-write laws.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
bam0813 said:
If that were true where were the restrictions on the civilians. They didnt have cannons because they didnt have a Sams club offering them for sale. Do you really think guns as you say are not arms? Lol they are literally called firearms. Guns were cannons. Ever hear some say nice firecannon or this firegrenade is a collectible
Click to expand...
I didn't say guns were not arms, I said they were arms, along with cannon, grenades and rockets, the 2nd was for military purposes and small arms alone are not adequate for defense. Back in the founders day (of paramount importance to federalist judges) rockets, as in rockets red glare and bombs (as in bursting in air), private cannons were common and they had soldiers called grenadiers, who threw hand grenades.

So does the federal government have the authority to regulate guns or do the states? Can the feds prohibit machine guns and personal artillery? Can they even regulate semi automatic weapons out of existence?
 
A

ActionianJacksonian

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
Wait until they get around to overturning those precedents too. The judicial "philosophy" is originalist, the intentions of the founders and states rights are supreme with this bunch. Interestingly the federal government heavily regulated radio, TV and phones, but not the press. They need to do the same thing again with increased FCC powers, broadcasters have an obligation of public service, not spreading bullshit that kills hundreds of thousands like Trump and foxnews did with covid. But I suppose with this bunch broadcasting will end up a state's right too.

The idea with conservative judges is to strictly follow the founders original intent and ignore social justice. It turns the law into an algorithm that lawyers can game and removes judgement from judges. It turns the US constitution into a dead document that fails to address the changes in society and the world, instead of living document that meets the needs of modern citizens. They overturned 50 years of precedent to overturn Row, lied to congress and mislead them about the issue to gain their appointments. If the democrats win they will hold impeachment hearings to soften them up before packing the court. It was just another way to hold onto power after their best before date expired.
Click to expand...
If I'm reading this right you're saying they had 50 years to make and Ammendment out of Roe and simply didn't.

The precedent that modern tech still facilitates rights is upheld. Just now in Bruen even. We all used to agree on these basic things. Now we deal with foreign trolls influencing voters and edited White House transcripts.

Are you in a blue state?
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
PJ Diaz said:
Right, because that's the job of judges; to interpret the law, not re-write the law. It's the job of elected officials to write/re-write laws.
Click to expand...
That is not how it really works in any liberal democracy, the legislative branch is decades behind society in America and the courts have to deal with the failures of the congress. The constitution is either a living document or a dead one, because if it's dead, then so is America.
 
DIY-HP-LED

DIY-HP-LED

Well-Known Member
ActionianJacksonian said:
If I'm reading this right you're saying they had 50 years to make and Ammendment out of Roe and simply didn't.

The precedent that modern tech still facilitates rights is upheld. Just now in Bruen even. We all used to agree on these basic things. Now we deal with foreign trolls influencing voters and edited White House transcripts.

Are you in a blue state?
Click to expand...
I'm Canadian and make no secret about it, I live in a civilized country, but I seem to know more about American law, the constitution and founding ethos of America than most Americans. My only real interest in American politics is making sure you maintain a liberal democracy and are defending your constitution. Guns in America affect Canada and smuggled weapons are an issue. If America loses it's liberal democracy or descends into civil war, we will get hit by the mess. Make abortion illegal nationally and we could have a refugee crises with American women.

America won't be white again, those days are over and the sooner the losers get over it or just die off the better. You won't have a country long with two truths, one true and one false, a house divided cannot stand. Unlike many Americans, I'm not a war with America, or its constitution and have many friends and family who are Americans. We get the same TV and media you do and the demographics are about the same. The country is about 3/4 left leaning, communists by some American standards! :lol:
 
PJ Diaz

PJ Diaz

Well-Known Member
DIY-HP-LED said:
That is not how it really works in any liberal democracy, the legislative branch is decades behind society in America and the courts have to deal with the failures of the congress. The constitution is either a living document or a dead one, because if it's dead, then so is America.
Click to expand...
So you feel that the judicial branch should do the job of the legislature, due to "the failures of the congress"? Next, you'll want the president to do the job of congress due to their failures to act. Oh wait, they've been doing that for decades already by having wars in other counties without congressional approval. Maybe we should just get rid of congress alltogether and we can appoint your preferred liberal dictator. All good?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top