Bored? Want to give me opinion on 2nd amend?

[stylett9]

So one of my current questions on homework is as follows:

Review the given scenario, prsent each persons credibility and authority in regards to the scenario, and state which person is the one with the most credibility and authority.
Scenario: In regards to the original intent of the second amendment of the constitution, who holds the most credibility and authority? Who would be ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th?

A) President of USA
B) A supreme court Judge
C) A constitutional Historian
D) The president of the NRA

you guys dn't have to answer the entire question since i know it's kind of long, but i'd appreciate any kind of opinion or input.

thanks!

[curtisfong]

Easy.

Credibility: Whoever I happen to agree with the most. Thanks to cognitive dissonance, we give those that disagree with our opinions the least amount of credibility.

Authority: The Judicial Branch generally is given the authority to interpret the constitution. However, historically, the executive branch gets periodically jealous of the judicial branch, and snatches as much authority as the fickle public can be convinced it requires, depending on the current threat level.

[oaklander]

LOL - the irony here is that the person with the least credibility is the president.

So one of my current questions on homework is as follows:

Review the given scenario, prsent each persons credibility and authority in regards to the scenario, and state which person is the one with the most credibility and authority.
Scenario: In regards to the original intent of the second amendment of the constitution, who holds the most credibility and authority? Who would be ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th?

A) President of USA
B) A supreme court Judge
C) A constitutional Historian
D) The president of the NRA

you guys dn't have to answer the entire question since i know it's kind of long, but i'd appreciate any kind of opinion or input.

thanks!

[curtisfong]

LOL - the irony here is that the person with the least credibility is the president.

Thanks to cognitive dissonance, we give those that disagree with our opinions the least amount of credibility.

but I repeat myself.

[bohoki]

So one of my current questions on homework is as follows:

Review the given scenario, prsent each persons credibility and authority in regards to the scenario, and state which person is the one with the most credibility and authority.
Scenario: In regards to the original intent of the second amendment of the constitution, who holds the most credibility and authority? Who would be ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th?

A) President of USA
B) A supreme court Judge
C) A constitutional Historian
D) The president of the NRA

you guys dn't have to answer the entire question since i know it's kind of long, but i'd appreciate any kind of opinion or input.

thanks!

i would assume the president would be in charge of the militia at the highest level of the heirarchy but authority and credibility are different things

i do not think i understand what you are asking

are you asking who is to interpret "law" it seems that is under the authority of the supreme court

but if they are corrupted enough to rule a triangle has 4 sides its time for revolution

i give most credibility to pen and teller

1GNu7ldL1LM

[ChuckBooty]

I would say the constitutional historian (as long as the historian had no political agenda).

[sleepur606]

I would say the person with most credibility is the Constitutional Historian. Having studied the Constitution, they would be better inclined to glean information from the words that certain people don't seem to understand.

As far as authority, it rests with the Judicial to interpret the Constitution and establish whether something is or is not Constitutional.

The President of the US and the President of the NRA both have agendas to make certain people happy and, as such, should not be trusted. (I don't like politicians.) However, I would be inclined to give more credibility to the President of the NRA as he has studied the subject which he is fighting for, or he should have. More often than not, the POTUS has no idea what the hell is going on in the minds of the people...at least in my opinion.

Feel free to elaborate.

[oaklander]

No, the point I was making was that out of those four people, the president is likely the LEAST informed about Constitutional Law, and specifically, the Second Amendment.

This would hold true for any president. They are politicians, generally not 2A scholars.

The most credible person, IMHO, is a constitutional law scholar.

A lot of the hinges on the definition of the word "credible" - e.g., offering reasonable grounds for being believed.


Thanks to cognitive dissonance, we give those that disagree with our opinions the least amount of credibility.

but I repeat myself.

[curtisfong]

No, the point I was making was that out of those four people, the president is likely the LEAST informed about Constitutional Law, and specifically, the Second Amendment.

This would hold true for any president. They are politicians, generally not 2A scholars.

The most credible person, IMHO, is a constitutional law scholar.

A lot of the hinges on the definition of the word "credible" - e.g., offering reasonable grounds for being believed.

Well said. I agree 100%.

[stylett9]

great feedback guys, keep them coming. :-)

[DarkHorse]

Credibility:
1) Constitutional historian - having dedicated career to studying the document, they should know the most about it

2) SCOTUS justice - expected to make rulings based on Constitution, so should have legitimate knowledge

3) PONRA - the leader of an organization dedicated to safeguarding the 2nd Amendment should be knowledgable about the subject

4) POTUS - politicians, generally speaking, say whatever will get them in office, and almost always have agendas, which may have little to do with historical fact

Authority:
1) SCOTUS Justice - in theory, a Justice has the opportunity to rule laws as Const/Un-Const, so any law enacted by Congres/POTUS could be struck down by SCOTUS

2) POTUS - ability to sign laws into action, and write Executive Orders, which determine how certain laws will be enforced

3) PONRA - the NRA has a large membership, and holds legislators accountable for their votes, but he/she has no authority regarding bills/laws/etc.

4) Const. Historian - can write books and provide evidence for legislators, but has no ability to produce/enact legislation, and would hold little sway w.r.t. elections

[oaklander]

great feedback guys, keep them coming. :-)

Make sure you define "credibility" and "authority" at the beginning of the essay.

They *can* mean the same thing, or different things, depending on how defined. . .

[Meplat]

The choices are flawed. POTUS and PONRA are both irrelevant. A constitutional scholar, devoid of agenda (a man devoid of agenda does not exist), could be helpful. A SCOTUS justice does not usually or decisively act alone. The opinion of one justice may be 180 out from the opinion of another, so the opinion of one justice is worthless. The opinion of the full panel of SCOTUS justices, while often imperfect, is the most credible and authoritative guidance we have.

[Lex Arma]

The question makes no sense. Authority and credibility are not similar concepts. Choose one or the other.

Authority is a legal/political concept. The answer to this question is an exercise left to the student,... look it up. [Hint: start with constitutional text, then proceed to statutes, then regulations. Do this at federal and state levels of government.]

Credibility is an attribute of individuals, not occupations. Give me a name and some time for research and I might donate my time and peg the liars for you.

[GuyW]

Flawed question...

Authority: 200 million Americans...some with guns.... (sig line)

.