Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 3:37 am

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
 Supreme Court grants cert in the Chicago gun ban case. 
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Supreme Court grants cert in the Chicago gun ban case.
PostPosted: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:17 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
Chunkychuck wrote:
"Remember that incorporation generally is an abrogation of state's rights, and that conservatives generally SUPPORT state's rights; hopefully, not his time. :wink: Have fun being a part time liberal."

Just to have a constitutional discussion. How can the argument be made that incorporation is an abrogation of state's rights when the states, at least 3/4 of them did in approving the 14th Amendment, agreed this further defining of the rights of the citizens to be correct? Abrogation, no; strict constructionist, yes! Sounds conservative to me. :D


Well, conservatives generally want a less powerful central government. The various states were the original sovereings, after England was tossed. Until the Civil War, the states handled almost everthing that happened between a citizen and the government.

After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment was adopted, mostly to punish the Southern States and to ensure that slavery was not restablished. When Teddy Roosevelt did his trustbusting, his opponents said that was beyond the power of the central government. The Courts came up with the interswtate commerce clause to justify that. When Franklin Roosevelt established the New Deal, the Supreme Court felt it was byond the power of the federal government, so he "packed the court" with judges who used the 14th Amendment and the 5th Amendment, and said "due process" justified whatever they wanted justified. We call them "liberal judges".

In the 60's the Warren Court basically used the same analysis to justify all manner of things, from exclusionary rules in criminal cases to civil rights including affirmative action.

Then Regan and Bush 1 and Bush 2 tried to pack the court with judges who would not extend the power of the federal government, but instead leave matters to the states. Therein lies our problem. The second amendment has never been enforced against a state, the others have because the more liberal courts have said so. Whild conservatives have not yet decided to just overule the precdents of other courts. they may say that gun control is the perogative of the individual states, Then they would say the second amendment meant whatever your state supreme court and your state legislature want. We know what Chicago IL wants, and don't like it.

We need a liberal interpretation again. :P


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Supreme Court grants cert in the Chicago gun ban case.
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 4:40 am 
Senior Member

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 8:53 am
Posts: 239
Dick Unger wrote:
If we win this one, then "reasonable regulation" (probably licensing and registration) will be at issue. IMHO.



In Heller wasn't it decided that "reasonable regulations" are still ok, such as not taking guns into sensitive areas, felons and what not.


Wouldn't Licensing and Registration fall under the "reasonable" part?

.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Supreme Court grants cert in the Chicago gun ban case.
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:22 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 7:23 pm
Posts: 1419
Location: SE MPLS
Dick Unger wrote:
Well, conservatives generally want a less powerful central government.

Conservatives want a system that preserves individual rights. Federal guarantees of individual rights are not contrary to this principle.

_________________
Jeff Dege


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Supreme Court grants cert in the Chicago gun ban case.
PostPosted: Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:11 am 
Member

Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:37 am
Posts: 25
Dick Unger wrote:
Chunkychuck wrote:
"Remember that incorporation generally is an abrogation of state's rights, and that conservatives generally SUPPORT state's rights; hopefully, not his time. :wink: Have fun being a part time liberal."

Just to have a constitutional discussion. How can the argument be made that incorporation is an abrogation of state's rights when the states, at least 3/4 of them did in approving the 14th Amendment, agreed this further defining of the rights of the citizens to be correct? Abrogation, no; strict constructionist, yes! Sounds conservative to me. :D


Well, conservatives generally want a less powerful central government. The various states were the original sovereings, after England was tossed. Until the Civil War, the states handled almost everthing that happened between a citizen and the government.

After the Civil War, the 14th Amendment was adopted, mostly to punish the Southern States and to ensure that slavery was not restablished. When Teddy Roosevelt did his trustbusting, his opponents said that was beyond the power of the central government. The Courts came up with the interswtate commerce clause to justify that. When Franklin Roosevelt established the New Deal, the Supreme Court felt it was byond the power of the federal government, so he "packed the court" with judges who used the 14th Amendment and the 5th Amendment, and said "due process" justified whatever they wanted justified. We call them "liberal judges".

In the 60's the Warren Court basically used the same analysis to justify all manner of things, from exclusionary rules in criminal cases to civil rights including affirmative action.

Then Regan and Bush 1 and Bush 2 tried to pack the court with judges who would not extend the power of the federal government, but instead leave matters to the states. Therein lies our problem. The second amendment has never been enforced against a state, the others have because the more liberal courts have said so. Whild conservatives have not yet decided to just overule the precdents of other courts. they may say that gun control is the perogative of the individual states, Then they would say the second amendment meant whatever your state supreme court and your state legislature want. We know what Chicago IL wants, and don't like it.

We need a liberal interpretation again. :P


I would agree most conservatives feel less government is better. But I also believe that most conservatives believe in a narrow, strict interpretation of the constitution that does not allow the latitude you have talked about with some of the courts. So to me, as a conservative, the 2nd A should be incorporated as the others have to have a uniform process in place. I would say the 2nd A had not been addressed by those "liberal courts" because they didn't consider the 2nd A to be an individual right but a state right. I can't believe the Robert's court accepted the Chicago case to undermine the 2nd A or to say it is the prerogative of the states. That's what we have already. I think they want to place the 2nd A on the same level as the others. My only hope is that there is a thought process or plan in mind that takes the phrase "shall not be infringed" really serious so that the decision they render will leave no doubt that it is an individual right and not a federal or state right.


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 34 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 44 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group