if the language of sec 8 is as plain a delegation of power as you say it is, how is it that NOT ONE Gun control bill has ever invoked anything other than the commerce clause as jurisdictional support.
how was that so discovered when that was the obvious intent of the founders
Why is that even important? I could not care less.
Why did it take a Scalia over two centuries to find the individual right explanation Turtle? Do you also want that flushed because it took too long for you?
You cannot have it both ways.
the individual right was not even questioned until federal gun control was contemplated. as Cruikshank noted, the right only restricted federal encroachments. remind me when federal gun control was first attempted? before that, why would it come up?
Because the context of WHEN is as important as the context of Where, Who, How, and Why.and I should care more about that than the reality I live in for the year 2014 because ...???????
Because the context of WHEN is as important as the context of Where, Who, How, and Why.
So please quote the COurt decision which said there was an individual right before Heller sometime in the previous two centuries.
You know it never happened so stop with the 140 year stuff already because it dwarfs what Scalia did in Heller.
And why should I care more about what somebody tries to tell me somebody 230 years ago believed in a world which no longer exists today?
show me the supreme court case that said that sec 8 was a delegation of such a power to the federal government
Ah.Screw the hypothetical person. We are talking about the author of the statement - one Thomas Jefferson. Got that?
Yesterday I presented the views of Jefferson on that very topic from two different Jefferson sites and there is no doubt at all that he considered Africans as MEN who were entitled to rights. see posts 248 and 253 for the verifiable evidence.
The Constitution says it is
CONGRESS SHALL HAVE POWER.....
Its right there for all to see and requires no interpretation of any kind.
because the issue is what was intended back then
why do you refuse to say the POWER for what?
Terrific. When somebody digs up the dead founders and finds a way to communicate with them about the current 2014 America I might actually care.
In the end it's up to you.Maybe you have a point. So why should I care more about what somebody tries to tell me somebody 230 years ago believed in a world which no longer exists today?
You wanted to know if gave the federal government power. I showed you it did.
I provided what you wanted.
Ah.
If we're talking specifically about Jefferson, and further specifically about a Jefferson who some evidence indicates DID believe that "all men were created equal" as we understand the phrase today (or close to that at least).
I would suggest that he intentionally wrote the law without specifying what qualifications were required to be counted as "all men".
I would further suggest that he did so because he knew any attempt at trying to free slaves at that time would probablly derail the entire process of forming the United States.
Way I look at it is, if they really didn't want slaves to be considered equal to them, they would specifically have noted that in the constitution.
It probably got by those who WOULD have objected because they considered slaves property and not human, so it never occurred to them that eventually someone would argue that slaves were humans too...
Politics is really a matter of compromising on some things to get the best result you can.
In this day and age, the very idea of compromising on slavery is so abhorrent you would NEVER get enough people to agree. If nothing else, because the backlash would ruin them.
In Jefferson's day, the opposite was the case.
The context of when is important to consider.
you could use that to claim the federal government has the power to do anything it wants
where it say anything about the POWER TO ENACT FEDERAL GUN CONTROL
I want to see that actual words
It's simple.I do not think you have to be a genius or mind reader to know that ALL MEN means ALL MEN.
To go any further down this road is an insult to the intelligence of anybody who can read above a third grade level and knows the meaning of a three letter word - ALL.
That is your strawman. It is not mine.
nah - you don't. You have already been given the words and the Supreme Court says it allows the power to enact federal gun control but you ignore that also and take issue with it viewing FDR as some sort of great satan. So you really do not want to see anything that does not agree with you so why ask for it in the first place?
It's simple.
ALL MEN to a person who does not consider a black person a man, but property, is VASTLY different from our current interpretation of "ALL MEN".
OW, if the founders were intentionally lying when they said "all men", they screwed themselves anyway - it just took us a couple centuries too long to realize and apply the slip.
This means that such a person could easily vote for a law that says "ALL MEN" without realizing he just opened the door to freeing his property from slavery.
you merely said congress has the power
you didn't bother to specify what
You asked if the federal government had the power and I showed you that. You can read the Constitution for yourself. But why bother?
the power to regulate guns and no, you did not
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?