Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Can we send the gun posts back to the gun forum yet? [View all]jody
(26,624 posts)98. Agree and those new to discussing unalienable rights are shocked to find that SCOTUS said
Page 19 of SCOTUS' decision on Heller:
By referring to the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments, its clear that SCOTUS used "pre-existing right" in the same sense that PA and VT used natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable rights.
A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OR STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA - 28 Sept. 1776 "That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/vt01.asp
A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE STATE OF VERMONT- July 8, 1777]
I. THAT all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
NOTE PA and VT statements differ only in the use of inalienable versus unalienable, a difference that occurred when the Declaration of Independence was written with Jefferson using inalienable and Adams using unalienable. Apparently Adams had the final say and the DOI used unalienable.
c. Meaning of the Operative Clause. Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment.We look to this because [font color = ff0000 size = 3]it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right.[/font] The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it shall not be infringed. As we said in United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, 553 (1876), {t}his is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed . . . .
By referring to the First, Second, and Fourth Amendments, its clear that SCOTUS used "pre-existing right" in the same sense that PA and VT used natural, inherent, inalienable/unalienable rights.
A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE COMMONWEALTH OR STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA - 28 Sept. 1776 "That all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and inalienable rights, amongst which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety."
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/vt01.asp
A DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF THE INHABITANTS OF THE STATE OF VERMONT- July 8, 1777]
I. THAT all men are born equally free and independent, and have certain natural, inherent and unalienable rights, amongst which are the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety.
NOTE PA and VT statements differ only in the use of inalienable versus unalienable, a difference that occurred when the Declaration of Independence was written with Jefferson using inalienable and Adams using unalienable. Apparently Adams had the final say and the DOI used unalienable.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
172 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
And then there is the question of boredom. I don't know about you, but I am bored to death
CTyankee
Jul 2012
#130
I know this episode has labeled me another "gun-nut" simply because I point out the flaws
Egalitarian Thug
Jul 2012
#123
It is getting repetetive and obscene, IMO. As we mow down their arguments they get more
CTyankee
Jul 2012
#13
It would be interesting to count how many of the gun threads being complained about
shadowrider
Jul 2012
#153
I wouldn't take that bet. The firearm advocates here are definitely a large cut above
Egalitarian Thug
Jul 2012
#159
It's almost like the forum had a feature to deal with that on your own...
AtheistCrusader
Jul 2012
#47
The vast majority of toxic bile in the last two days has come from anti-gun rights posters
Johnny Rico
Jul 2012
#86
"The vast majority of toxic bile in the last two days has come from anti-gun rights posters"
Spitfire of ATJ
Jul 2012
#147
truly, hope the admin are reading this thread. bupkus really has a way with words.
Tuesday Afternoon
Jul 2012
#36
you know it is nasty what you wrote. you even addressed the jury and mentioned that it might
Tuesday Afternoon
Jul 2012
#60
99% of the venom in the last couple of days has been from anti-gun posters.
Johnny Rico
Jul 2012
#38
I dislike guns and I wish everyone felt that way, but your post is NOT helping. nt
Chorophyll
Jul 2012
#41
Mine passed away in 2007. She once chased a thug out of her house with her .38.
Higgs boson
Jul 2012
#59
SO true. I trashed the gungeon and have been ignoring all those spewing RW shit.
morningfog
Jul 2012
#107
They couldn't get this post hidden, so now they're pleading for you to "self delete."
apocalypsehow
Jul 2012
#172
Also Admin please note how many times it is called Gungeon and consider a name change, thanks.
Tuesday Afternoon
Jul 2012
#28
Perhaps 65-70% of those who vote Democrat support RKBA. Are you suggesting DU ignore them? nt
jody
Jul 2012
#50
All the talk and nothing will happen with any type of gun control. I don't mind
southernyankeebelle
Jul 2012
#58
Yes and again I had someone who didn't agree with me get nasty. But I think everyone is
southernyankeebelle
Jul 2012
#104
Agree and those new to discussing unalienable rights are shocked to find that SCOTUS said
jody
Jul 2012
#98
Meanwhile the momentum against Romney is losing steam. Unfortunate. n/t
FedUpWithIt All
Jul 2012
#75
I agree. Initially I could understand the spillover, now it's getting absurd and some people appear
MADem
Jul 2012
#103
I'm getting tire of hitting the trash button. Can't believe it's allowed to dominate every board nt
progressivebydesign
Jul 2012
#119
Since DU3's inception, I've trashed 30 threads - 28 just today about guns
closeupready
Jul 2012
#146