PDA

View Full Version : A new amendment for BofR


radioman
10-03-2009, 5:19 PM
First let me say, my intent with this post is to spark debate. We are in court, were out of court, much like last summer, we will spend the coming summer in wait of, the upcoming ruling from the court. It seems we have a new light with 14A, and well it should be. But what of the history of the 14thA, has it not been kicked around by this court before, and will the courts keep kicking it long after this fight is over? It is not the fault of the court, or of the 14th, as it was put into the Constitution with good intent, but as most of us know intent is just that, intent. It may be time to get the job done, once and for all. The 14th is so large of word as to obscure it’s meaning, and which gives room for the kicking. Now let me take out the content of guns, and put in the content of rights, all of the bill of rights. Why is it in this state we do not enjoy the 7thA? is it not in the bill of right? And if there is in the bill of rights the 7thA , should not all citizens, every one of us from coast to coast, enjoy it? I’m not known for being pc, and my words have upset some in the past, and might in the future, but are not those words not under the bill of rights, and if not why? It may well be time to make an Amendment to our constitution to spell out the meaning of the bill of right.

The Bill Of Rights belongs to all Citizens of these United States of America, each and every one of them. In all States, territory’s and possessions of the United States of America, the Individual Citizen shall enjoy at all times and in all places the full bill of rights. And it is the will of the people that these rights shall not be infringed ever.

Far less words then that of the 14th , but what the 14th should have said, if Saf Nra and Cgf were to put this on the forefront it would do for all time fix, what we sit in wait for now. But to say it can’t be done would be like Washington saying the war was lost without putting a ball in his musket .

HondaMasterTech
10-03-2009, 6:23 PM
Our noses are far away from our butts for a reason.

radioman
10-03-2009, 7:05 PM
Our noses are far away from our butts for a reason.

And what does that have to do with the bill of rights, or are you saying what I said was crap?

Purple K
10-03-2009, 7:52 PM
Remember that the driving force behind the 14th was that many southern states had passed laws that forbit blacks from owning guns after the civil war. The 14th has been tied to the 2nd from day one.

radioman
10-03-2009, 7:59 PM
Remember that the driving force behind the 14th was that many southern states had passed laws that forbit blacks from owning guns after the civil war. The 14th has been tied to the 2nd from day one.

I know that, think of 2A as a pole, and the 14th as a ball and think about what you said. The 14th tied to the 2a and what the courts have been doing with it all these years,

nicki
10-03-2009, 8:30 PM
Getting a constitutional amendment passed would be difficult, but your proposal certainly would spark debate if it ever gained traction.

The Majority of Americans are under the illusion that the Bill of Rights can be interpreted in PLAIN ENGLISH and that they apply to the states.

Your proposal would be good to wake the sheep up from their sleep that they don't have rights they think they have.

Of course the shock would be too much for many to take. Just ask NEO when he took the red pill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_8Zq_iWuFg

Nicki

radioman
10-03-2009, 9:28 PM
nicki you are right as to the point of difficult and sleeping sheep, my point is we need the traction to get the rights we should have, and to get the sheep to follow, not make it about guns. but instead about rights they don't have. I have to think the years between 1776 and 1783 were difficult, this would be far less so.

hoffmang
10-04-2009, 11:32 AM
Let's assume we overcome odds very much against us. Do you not realize that it would take at least one more court case to actually give the amendment teeth? The 14th Amendment went down in flames in The Slaughterhouse Cases. It's going to take us 137 years to finally get a case to undo that mess.

The RKBA will be in full force and effect before Independence Day 2010. No other proposal is faster in practical reality than the current path we're on.

-Gene

HondaMasterTech
10-04-2009, 4:40 PM
The RKBA will be in full force and effect before Independence Day 2010.
-Gene

You've been quoted.

artherd
10-04-2009, 5:11 PM
What you described is exactly what the 14th already says. And the courts know it. We just need to give them opportunity to say so by filing the right cases. (Oh wait we already have.)

artherd
10-04-2009, 5:11 PM
You've been quoted.

Careful - he's good at that.

dantodd
10-04-2009, 5:24 PM
The RKBA will be in full force and effect before Independence Day 2010. No other proposal is faster in practical reality than the current path we're on.


I just hope people don't misread this and assume that you mean "our" battles will all be settled by next Independence Day. Peņa, and Sykes will still have to be argued and the suit will still have to be filed against the AWB or whatever the next target is.

This is just the beginning of our battles in California. Having the full force of the second amendment at our disposal means all that CGF has been doing is on a solid foundation.

SkatinJJ
10-04-2009, 7:39 PM
To me, full force means Vermont carry. The only "reasonable" gun laws I can see are violent felons not being able to purchase/own guns. Or, a 4 year old kid not being able to buy a gun.

I do agree with the idea of a (very) mentally ill person not having RKBA.

the deranged killer who escaped in Washington State last week is an example.

JJ

radioman
10-04-2009, 10:28 PM
artherd, no man can make book on what the court will do, I know what we all hope they will do, and as Gene said, the 14th went down in flames. yes we do have it up and flying right now, but what do we do if the court shoot us down, again. And then there is the import of the two words, privileges and immunities, amendments 3,4,5,6,7 and 8 are immunities, and privileges can be taken away, is the first a privilege, no. do we want the second a privilege, again I say no. I hope gene is right about the 4th of july, and I do not want anyone to think I'm throwing water on the fire, I just want to point to what we might have to do to get what should be ours now, I'm not saying we can't milk from the cow, but I am asking what will we do if we can't

dantodd
10-04-2009, 10:36 PM
To me, full force means Vermont carry. The only "reasonable" gun laws I can see are violent felons not being able to purchase/own guns. Or, a 4 year old kid not being able to buy a gun.

Why would a former felon not have 2A rights? Do they not have the right to be free of tyranny? Do they not have the right to self defense? Have they not already been punished for the crime they committed?

artherd
10-04-2009, 10:43 PM
artherd, no man can make book on what the court will do

Respectfully disagree. Most of the people I socialize with are actually pretty good at booking odds on high court decisions - usually because they are stacking the deck :D :D :D

radioman
10-05-2009, 12:34 AM
Do you think that a person who kidnapps and tortures someones child deserves the right to defend themselves? Things change once you decide to prey upon other human beings.

I would hope someone like that would be locked away forever.

radioman
10-05-2009, 12:44 AM
Why would a former felon not have 2A rights? Do they not have the right to be free of tyranny? Do they not have the right to self defense? Have they not already been punished for the crime they committed?

I think that is where we draw the line, if it was a pot crime from 1971 maybe, a drunk driving felon, I don't want him to have a car, let alone a gun.

Decoligny
10-05-2009, 7:53 AM
First let me say, my intent with this post is to spark debate. We are in court, were out of court, much like last summer, we will spend the coming summer in wait of, the upcoming ruling from the court. It seems we have a new light with 14A, and well it should be. But what of the history of the 14thA, has it not been kicked around by this court before, and will the courts keep kicking it long after this fight is over? It is not the fault of the court, or of the 14th, as it was put into the Constitution with good intent, but as most of us know intent is just that, intent. It may be time to get the job done, once and for all. The 14th is so large of word as to obscure it’s meaning, and which gives room for the kicking. Now let me take out the content of guns, and put in the content of rights, all of the bill of rights. Why is it in this state we do not enjoy the 7thA? is it not in the bill of right? And if there is in the bill of rights the 7thA , should not all citizens, every one of us from coast to coast, enjoy it? I’m not known for being pc, and my words have upset some in the past, and might in the future, but are not those words not under the bill of rights, and if not why? It may well be time to make an Amendment to our constitution to spell out the meaning of the bill of right.

The Bill Of Rights belongs to all Citizens of these United States of America, each and every one of them. In all States, territory’s and possessions of the United States of America, the Individual Citizen shall enjoy at all times and in all places the full bill of rights. And it is the will of the people that these rights shall not be infringed ever.
Far less words then that of the 14th , but what the 14th should have said, if Saf Nra and Cgf were to put this on the forefront it would do for all time fix, what we sit in wait for now. But to say it can’t be done would be like Washington saying the war was lost without putting a ball in his musket .

As it stands right now, the Bill of Rights does belong to all Citizens of these United States of America.

However, not all of them apply to State and Local Governments.

I think the following would be better:

The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments to the Constitution are to be free from any and all infringement from any level of Government, Federal, State, or Local.

Bugei
10-05-2009, 8:59 AM
The RKBA will be in full force and effect before Independence Day 2010. No other proposal is faster in practical reality than the current path we're on.

-Gene

Holy smoke! I'll schedule a Happy Dance now, just in case you're right. I take a more jaundiced view, but reading you say that makes me one happy camper!

radioman
10-05-2009, 9:14 AM
Decoligny, I like that, less words and to the point.

Mikeb
10-05-2009, 11:15 AM
The Bill of Rights seems to me to be about the rights of the people. It also seems like the tenth amendment
"Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
It seems like the "peoples rights, the Bill of Rights" is guaranteed by the tenth.
hope for the best
Mike