The Illegitimacy of the Supreme Court

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The other 9 amendments in the BOR recognize individual rights. The 2nd amendment created the state national guards. It’s a collective right, not an individual right. It’s just that it was accidentally inserted into a document that otherwise had a listing of individual rights. It was an oversight, a mistake. The sooner we acknowledge that the sooner we can do away with these guns.

Yes, the framers spent all that time and effort, yet made such a mistake. Must be nice in your fantasy world.

If the framers could have known the state of gun violence in the US today, they never would have included the 2nd amendment as it is written.

It is so unfortunate that guns were invented then. More modern consumer products, like cars, are highly regulated.

Too bad the current court is not smart enough to understand societies need to evolve.

The Founding Fathers included the words "well regulated" for a reason... Guns need to be well regulated.

I think you are misunderstanding 'regulated' and using a modern definition about regulations.

Yeah, the Second Amendment should properly be read as "The right to bear arms shall not be infringed and shall not be regulated." That's clearly the textualist interpretation of "well-regulated."

Ugh, the sad thing is that an “originalist” could twist themselves into that conclusion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The other 9 amendments in the BOR recognize individual rights. The 2nd amendment created the state national guards. It’s a collective right, not an individual right. It’s just that it was accidentally inserted into a document that otherwise had a listing of individual rights. It was an oversight, a mistake. The sooner we acknowledge that the sooner we can do away with these guns.

Yes, the framers spent all that time and effort, yet made such a mistake. Must be nice in your fantasy world.

If the framers could have known the state of gun violence in the US today, they never would have included the 2nd amendment as it is written.

It is so unfortunate that guns were invented then. More modern consumer products, like cars, are highly regulated.

Too bad the current court is not smart enough to understand societies need to evolve.

The Founding Fathers included the words "well regulated" for a reason... Guns need to be well regulated.

The militia is to be “well regulated.” In addition, look at all the progressive $hithole cities (including DC) with the most gun laws - ironically, they have the most gun violence. Gee, ya think there might be other things at work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The other 9 amendments in the BOR recognize individual rights. The 2nd amendment created the state national guards. It’s a collective right, not an individual right. It’s just that it was accidentally inserted into a document that otherwise had a listing of individual rights. It was an oversight, a mistake. The sooner we acknowledge that the sooner we can do away with these guns.

Yes, the framers spent all that time and effort, yet made such a mistake. Must be nice in your fantasy world.

If the framers could have known the state of gun violence in the US today, they never would have included the 2nd amendment as it is written.

It is so unfortunate that guns were invented then. More modern consumer products, like cars, are highly regulated.

Too bad the current court is not smart enough to understand societies need to evolve.

The Founding Fathers included the words "well regulated" for a reason... Guns need to be well regulated.

The militia is to be “well regulated.” In addition, look at all the progressive $hithole cities (including DC) with the most gun laws - ironically, they have the most gun violence. Gee, ya think there might be other things at work?

The US is becoming a sh#thole country BECAUSE it is being flooded with guns. Gun deaths and mass shootings are up everywhere in this country - cities, suburban, exurban, and rural. Guns are now the #1 killer of children.

Sounds like a sh#thole country to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The other 9 amendments in the BOR recognize individual rights. The 2nd amendment created the state national guards. It’s a collective right, not an individual right. It’s just that it was accidentally inserted into a document that otherwise had a listing of individual rights. It was an oversight, a mistake. The sooner we acknowledge that the sooner we can do away with these guns.

Yes, the framers spent all that time and effort, yet made such a mistake. Must be nice in your fantasy world.

If the framers could have known the state of gun violence in the US today, they never would have included the 2nd amendment as it is written.

It is so unfortunate that guns were invented then. More modern consumer products, like cars, are highly regulated.

Too bad the current court is not smart enough to understand societies need to evolve.

The Founding Fathers included the words "well regulated" for a reason... Guns need to be well regulated.

The militia is to be “well regulated.” In addition, look at all the progressive $hithole cities (including DC) with the most gun laws - ironically, they have the most gun violence. Gee, ya think there might be other things at work?

Because the criminals are able to get guns easily in Virginia and Indiana (in the case of Chicago) - maybe if those places made it harder, it would be as much an issue. And...even with that, per capita crime is higher in red states than the so-called $hithole cities you are deriding.

[Anonymous]

A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Still says well regulated. But that religious objectors should not have to serve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Bill of Rights, the first 10 amendments in the Constitution, spells out Americans’ rights in relation to their government.

So the 2nd amendment refers to the rights of the individual. The framers understood that not everyone might understand the concept of the people having rights so they reiterated it in the 9th amendment because it would be impossible to enumerate every right.

9th amendment states - The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The other 9 amendments in the BOR recognize individual rights. The 2nd amendment created the state national guards. It’s a collective right, not an individual right. It’s just that it was accidentally inserted into a document that otherwise had a listing of individual rights. It was an oversight, a mistake. The sooner we acknowledge that the sooner we can do away with these guns.

Yes, the framers spent all that time and effort, yet made such a mistake. Must be nice in your fantasy world.

If the framers could have known the state of gun violence in the US today, they never would have included the 2nd amendment as it is written.

It is so unfortunate that guns were invented then. More modern consumer products, like cars, are highly regulated.

Too bad the current court is not smart enough to understand societies need to evolve.

The Founding Fathers included the words "well regulated" for a reason... Guns need to be well regulated.

The militia is to be “well regulated.” In addition, look at all the progressive $hithole cities (including DC) with the most gun laws - ironically, they have the most gun violence. Gee, ya think there might be other things at work?

Guns should be well regulated. The biggest "other thing at work" is that criminals find the weakest link, that being the states with the weakest laws. Try harder, use that grey matter. It's really not rocket science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Still says well regulated. But that religious objectors should not have to serve.

Yes, but read the bolded part.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Who cares what the "initial draft" said? My first drafts get trashed all the time. Clearly Madison's intent was compromised away.

The current text says "well regulated" and that clause is dismissed by this Supreme Court with a hand wave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Still says well regulated. But that religious objectors should not have to serve.

Yes, but read the bolded part.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Regulation is not infringement. We regulate cars, we require that they be registered, that drivers be trained, tested and licensed, and that they carry insurance - yet there's nobody running around shrieking about being infringed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Still says well regulated. But that religious objectors should not have to serve.

Yes, but read the bolded part.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

National Firearms Act and other laws regulate guns, but do not constitute infringement and have never been struck down as being infringement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Still says well regulated. But that religious objectors should not have to serve.

Yes, but read the bolded part.

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Regulation is not infringement. We regulate cars, we require that they be registered, that drivers be trained, tested and licensed, and that they carry insurance - yet there's nobody running around shrieking about being infringed.

Point is that it is an individual right, not a state right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A little history to help show the original intent of the 2nd amendment.

James Madison produced an initial draft of the Second Amendment as follows:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country: but no person religiously scrupulous of bearing arms shall be compelled to render military service in person.

Who cares what the "initial draft" said? My first drafts get trashed all the time. Clearly Madison's intent was compromised away.

The current text says "well regulated" and that clause is dismissed by this Supreme Court with a hand wave.

Are militias not well regulated? The part of 2nd amendment that applies to individuals is quite clear and any gun control regulation would be moot.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

I just learned that all of the votes to roll back women's reproductive rights came from Catholic Justices. Then I learned that the Supreme Court consists of seven Catholics, one Jew, and one Protestant.

In the U.S., about 45% of the population is Protestant versus 22% Catholic. So Catholics with 78% representation on the Supreme Court is *way* over-represented. It's no wonder that the Court's adoption of the Catholic position on abortion is viewed as illegitimate by much of the country.