LRS Scout <[email protected]> wrote: > > They also wanted us to be able to overthrow the government as necessary, > more so than defense from outside forces. They wanted the government to > quite literally fear us. > > We're talking about the bill of rights here, all of which are about the > people, the individuals. >
You're missing a subtle but KEY distinction ... The Bill of Rights was for all that you say - I totally agree. So here's the "but": it's mechanism to grant was NOT universal legislation. Its mechanism was simply to PREVENT FEDERAL LAW from applying to those items ... not to give you the citizen anything (except for preventing the feds legislating on these topics). It's subtle but extremely important. Do you know how I know I'm right? If the Bill of Rights *was* a document written for you the citizen (and not simply as curbs on the Feds) then we wouldn't need some loosey-goosey interpretation from the 14th from 130 years later to justify applying these federal curbs to the states. ----------------------------------- >From Wiki on the 14th: ----------------------------------- * Its Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken to ensure fairness. This clause has been used to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, as well as to recognize substantive and procedural rights. * Incorporation is the legal doctrine by which the Bill of Rights, either in full or in part, is applied to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. The basis for incorporation is substantive due process regarding substantive rights enumerated elsewhere in the Constitution, and procedural due process regarding procedural rights enumerated elsewhere in the Constitution.[24] Incorporation started in 1897 with a takings case,[25] continued with Gitlow v. New York (1925), which was a First Amendment case, and ... Check this out: * ...and accelerated in the 1940s and 1950s. Justice Hugo Black famously favored the jot-for-jot incorporation of the entire Bill of Rights. Justice Felix Frankfurter, however—joined later by Justice John M. Harlan—felt that the federal courts should only apply those sections of the Bill of Rights that were "fundamental to a scheme of ordered liberty." It was the latter course that the Warren Court of the 1960s took, although, almost all of the Bill of Rights has now been incorporated jot-for-jot against the states. So here's your gun rights hero: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Warr ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:358516 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
