Debated an attorney friend of mine...

[elsensei]

for the millionth time

the constitution does not grant rights. a piece of paper does not grant rights. it guarantees rights. it lists specifically things that the government cannot screw with. we really really really really really as a nation need to understand that the constitution does not grant or give rights to the people. the people have rights just by being alive, and the constitution limits what the government can screw with.

if only we followed it...

[Mikeb]

the constitution does not grant rights. a piece of paper does not grant rights. it guarantees rights. it lists specifically things that the government cannot screw with. we really really really really really as a nation need to understand that the constitution does not grant or give rights to the people. the people have rights just by being alive, and the constitution limits what the government can screw with.

if only we followed it...

Yep, seems like that's what the framers said.
thanks
Mike

[dwtt]

the constitution does not grant rights. a piece of paper does not grant rights. it guarantees rights. it lists specifically things that the government cannot screw with. we really really really really really as a nation need to understand that the constitution does not grant or give rights to the people. the people have rights just by being alive, and the constitution limits what the government can screw with.

Take it easy, not everyone passed high school civics like you did.
The lawyer who still thinks the 2nd A is a collective right may be an tax lawyer for all we know and has no idea what the US constitution stands for. He may not even know why it exists. It's possible, really.

[cassius]

the constitution does not grant rights. a piece of paper does not grant rights. it guarantees rights. it lists specifically things that the government cannot screw with. we really really really really really as a nation need to understand that the constitution does not grant or give rights to the people. the people have rights just by being alive, and the constitution limits what the government can screw with.

if only we followed it...

It doesn't even do that. The Constitution enumerates - lists - our inalienable rights. As teh Founders repeatedly explained both in teh documents and in their other notes and letters, our God-given rights, above and PRECEDING any form of government.


The thing that guarantees our rights is the 2nd Amendment. IT is the entire reason for its inclusion by our Founders.


To often people are either deliberately misled or grossly uninformed about that, because that religious angle is censored from the educational materials.
And it is the very crux of the issue liberals so often get wrong about our Bill of Rights. The BoR doesn't 'grant' us anything. In their wrongheaded worldview, they see the Declaration and Constitution as instruments of governmetn, GIVING things to the People. They are no such thing. They are OUR contract with ourselves, defining and delimiting government. Government we've allowed to become our master, which was never the Founders intent.

And it is from this fabric of 'educational' lies and misinformation that people like President Obama - who was styled as a Constitutional scholar during the campagin - can have the staggeringly obtuse opinion that the BoR is a list of 'negative rights'. A concept which is obscene fiction. And fraud.
And how a preponderance of Ivy-league constitutional law professors could file an amicus brief on Heller arguing that the 2nd was NOT an individual right.

And how our President, who took an oath to uphold the Constitution, can sit there and claim that the Constitution is fundamentally flawed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_xNyrzB0xI

You want to see how deep this fraud goes in our education systems, go look up the concepts of negative rights and negative liberty and see what deconstructionist garbage is being taught these days.

[cassius]

Take it easy, not everyone passed high school civics like you did.
The lawyer who still thinks the 2nd A is a collective right may be an tax lawyer for all we know and has no idea what the US constitution stands for. He may not even know why it exists. It's possible, really.

do they even teach Civics in high school any more? Seems the only parts they teach are those that support self-centered anarchy. They sure teach the 1st and 4th and 5th, but seemingly little else. And the 2nd not at all and when it's even mentioned it's the 'collective right' fraud.

We're in very serious trouble as a nation because we've allowed marxists to infest our education systems. They are teaching our children lies and distortions in almsot every field now. Even those not superficially related to politics. You don't have to look very hard to find 'social justice' garbage creeping into engineering and science fields. Used to just infest the Arts programs.
The damage is deep and broad and worsening.

[AaronHorrocks]

Why would the founding fathers want an army controlled by the government to preserve the security of a free state? That is just absurd.

Evil communist dictators all over the world do that, doncha know?

[HotRails]

Take it easy, not everyone passed high school civics like you did.
The lawyer who still thinks the 2nd A is a collective right may be an tax lawyer for all we know and has no idea what the US constitution stands for. He may not even know why it exists. It's possible, really.

He's a patent attorney actually, bright guy, but I suspect a very sheltered priveliged background. Not sure Im ready to take him shooting just yet, all 95 pounds of him may go flying in the opposite direction!! I think the approach Ill take if he broaches the subject again may be:

1. Showing how gun control has not reduced crime, (i.e. DC, NYC, NJ and the like)
2. Demonstrating how the 2A was a means of empowering the citizen, and that while all the amendments may have some disadvantages, the founders agreed that the empowerment of the citizen far outweighed these considerations.

If he responds well to these points then I will clarify some of the technical differences between FA, SA, assault rifle etc. It takes a lot of time and facts to dissassemble FUD!! If all this goes well then maybe Ill take him shooting!

[curtisfong]

maybe Ill take him shooting!

Do this FIRST, then do the rest. I guarantee results.

[leadchucker]

The Constitution enumerates - lists - our inalienable rights. As teh Founders repeatedly explained both in teh documents and in their other notes and letters, our God-given rights, above and PRECEDING any form of government.

...And it is the very crux of the issue liberals so often get wrong about our Bill of Rights. The BoR doesn't 'grant' us anything.

Just a note to say that it is really important to use the proper wording. It is the Bill of Rights that secured our inalienable rights, not the entire Constitution. Having three branches of government, for example, is not an inalienable right. It's may seem like a trivial distinction, but you don't want to find yourself having to backpedal if called on it while debating.