Why can't states pass gun laws ?

[Stormy Daniels]

The constitution was designed to limit the federal government. Not the state governments.

Why can't my state take my guns away ?

Incorporation.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

My state Constitution says the Right to Keep, and Bear Arms shall NOT BE QUESTIONED.

Thank You !!!!!

I feel that is probably the correct answer.

An appeal to the 2nd is an appeal to a fallacy absent incorporation (which sucks and is somehow derived from the 14th amendment in an ambiguous fashion....14th passed around 1865....incorporation started sometime in the early 1930's. They must have been really stupid back then).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

The constitution was designed to limit the federal government. Not the state governments.

Why can't my state take my guns away ?

Incorporation.

Selective Incorporation.

What is Meant by Selective Incorporation?

While I acknowledge it's existence...that does not make it any less a shit idea.

 

[OKTexas]

Because states cannot ignore the US Constitution or the 2nd amendment. States also cannot take away your right to free speech or force a religion on you.

Actually, they could.

After ratification, several states had state supported religions.

They were never challenged by the Federal Government.

They were long gone when the 14th was ratified.


.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Because states cannot ignore the US Constitution or the 2nd amendment. States also cannot take away your right to free speech or force a religion on you.

Actually, they could.

After ratification, several states had state supported religions.

They were never challenged by the Federal Government.

They were long gone when the 14th was ratified.


.

But not because they were challenged.

The states themselves chose to write them out.

Clarence Thomas recently hinted that such support today would be constitutional.

 

[Picaro]

The constitution was designed to limit the federal government. Not the state governments.

The Bill of rights only protects us from the federal government.

The Bill of Rights only protects us from the Federal Government.

Repeating a lie over and over again does not make it into truth, no matter how many times you repeat it.

What a disappointing response.

First of all, it isn't a lie. Or would you care to debate the purpose of the constituiton.

As was rightly pointed out, the heinous doctrine of selective incorporation may have answered the question......or maybe not.

The fact is that most states have similar language in their state constituitons. Now, that would be redundant if states didn't recongnize that they could, in fact, retract that right.

Let me be clear. I am not for gun control laws. I was asking the question.

I wanted to see who would provide an educated response. And who would give the left winger horsecrap kind of know-nothing response.

Clearly the right has work to do to educate people on the Constitution.

Original intent theory says the individual states can pass them, and they get to decide who is member in their 'militia' as well. Same with religion; they could indeed grant a favored sect taxing privileges and other bennies at the expense of other sects. And, good point re states showing the need for passing their own body of laws with similar language to the national Amendments in order to legalize whatever it was they wanted to address.

Many colonial govts. had gun control laws, and many states had them too; many town govts in the West had no problems confiscating them, either, so we do have a history of gun control, sometimes very severe controls. However, the Constitution pretty much stopped being relevant as a legal document with Lincoln's election; it's just an ideological political entity now. Original Intent is dead. Any Federal judge can make up whatever laws he wants to these days.

The Right and far Right have just as many sociopaths and idiots as the Left does.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

What a disappointing response.

First of all, it isn't a lie.

Yes, it is a lie. And will remain so, no matter how many times you repeat it.

The Tenth Amendment speaks of powers belonging to the federal government, powers belonging to the states, and powers belonging to the people. The primary point was to distinguish and limit those powers belonging to the federal government to that which is explicitly delegated thereto in the Constitution; and to prohibit the federal government from claiming, exercising, or interfering with powers that do not belong to it.

By the same principle, states are not allowed to exercise, claim, or interfere with powers that do not belong to them.

To whom does the right to keep and bear arms belong? Does the Second Amendment describe it as a right of the states?

 

[OKTexas]

My state Constitution says the Right to Keep, and Bear Arms shall NOT BE QUESTIONED.

Thank You !!!!!

I feel that is probably the correct answer.

An appeal to the 2nd is an appeal to a fallacy absent incorporation (which sucks and is somehow derived from the 14th amendment in an ambiguous fashion....14th passed around 1865....incorporation started sometime in the early 1930's. They must have been really stupid back then).

Before it there was nothing stopping a State governor from jailing the press or shutting down newspapers. The 1st amendment is a prohibition on congress, not the States. But it was the only one directed at congress.


.

 

[Picaro]

Because states cannot ignore the US Constitution or the 2nd amendment. States also cannot take away your right to free speech or force a religion on you.

Actually, they could.

After ratification, several states had state supported religions.

They were never challenged by the Federal Government.

They were long gone when the 14th was ratified.


.

Massachusetts was the last, did so around 1932-33 or so, iirc, so yes, long moot by the time of the 14th; pretty late, and they only bothered because of the huge demographic changes in the state's population, not any Federal ruling.

 

[Picaro]

My state Constitution says the Right to Keep, and Bear Arms shall NOT BE QUESTIONED.

Thank You !!!!!

I feel that is probably the correct answer.

An appeal to the 2nd is an appeal to a fallacy absent incorporation (which sucks and is somehow derived from the 14th amendment in an ambiguous fashion....14th passed around 1865....incorporation started sometime in the early 1930's. They must have been really stupid back then).

One possible path is to examine the legality of the 14th, and the other Amendments passed under the Chase Court 1860-1872. They contradictory rulings of that farce of a Court are many, no surprise given it was the most corrupt and crooked Court in our history.

 

[OKTexas]

Because states cannot ignore the US Constitution or the 2nd amendment. States also cannot take away your right to free speech or force a religion on you.

Actually, they could.

After ratification, several states had state supported religions.

They were never challenged by the Federal Government.

They were long gone when the 14th was ratified.


.

But not because they were challenged.

The states themselves chose to write them out.

Clarence Thomas recently hinted that such support today would be constitutional.

Considering current case law I would seriously doubt that.


.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

What a disappointing response.

First of all, it isn't a lie.

Yes, it is a lie. And will remain so, no matter how many times you repeat it.

The Tenth Amendment speaks of powers belonging to the federal government, powers belonging to the states, and powers belonging to the people. The primary point was to distinguish and limit those powers belonging to the federal government to that which is explicitly delegated thereto in the Constitution; and to prohibit the federal government from claiming, exercising, or interfering with powers that do not belong to it.

By the same principle, states are not allowed to exercise, claim, or interfere with powers that do not belong to them.

To whom does the right to keep and bear arms belong? Does the Second Amendment describe it as a right of the states?

It is quite clear in saying the federal government shall not infringe on that right. It says nothing about the states ability to do so.

As already pointed out, the federal government was not to make laws regarding religion. States were plenty free to do so and did.

So your attempt to translate it as such is without foundation.

Incoproration of the bill of rights would not been necessary using your logic.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

My state Constitution says the Right to Keep, and Bear Arms shall NOT BE QUESTIONED.

Thank You !!!!!

I feel that is probably the correct answer.

An appeal to the 2nd is an appeal to a fallacy absent incorporation (which sucks and is somehow derived from the 14th amendment in an ambiguous fashion....14th passed around 1865....incorporation started sometime in the early 1930's. They must have been really stupid back then).

One possible path is to examine the legality of the 14th, and the other Amendments passed under the Chase Court 1860-1872. They contradictory rulings of that farce of a Court are many, no surprise given it was the most corrupt and crooked Court in our history.

Correct and incorporation was not really in full gear until almost 60 years post the passaage of the 14th.

 

[Picaro]

Because states cannot ignore the US Constitution or the 2nd amendment. States also cannot take away your right to free speech or force a religion on you.

Actually, they could.

After ratification, several states had state supported religions.

They were never challenged by the Federal Government.

They were long gone when the 14th was ratified.


.

But not because they were challenged.

The states themselves chose to write them out.

Clarence Thomas recently hinted that such support today would be constitutional.

Considering current case law I would seriously doubt that.


.

Case law changes every time the Court replaces Judges. Most of the time, anyway. It will certainly change wit the next two Trump appointments.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Because states cannot ignore the US Constitution or the 2nd amendment. States also cannot take away your right to free speech or force a religion on you.

Actually, they could.

After ratification, several states had state supported religions.

They were never challenged by the Federal Government.

They were long gone when the 14th was ratified.


.

But not because they were challenged.

The states themselves chose to write them out.

Clarence Thomas recently hinted that such support today would be constitutional.

Considering current case law I would seriously doubt that.


.

Yes, I get that.

But no matter what you doubt, that a SCOTUS judge would hint at such a thing informs that the crapp associated with the supposed "separation of church and state" started out as a federal thing only.

There is no difference in the 2nd.

Most states put that same language in their constutitons. What did they know that we don't ?

 

[OKTexas]

My state Constitution says the Right to Keep, and Bear Arms shall NOT BE QUESTIONED.

Thank You !!!!!

I feel that is probably the correct answer.

An appeal to the 2nd is an appeal to a fallacy absent incorporation (which sucks and is somehow derived from the 14th amendment in an ambiguous fashion....14th passed around 1865....incorporation started sometime in the early 1930's. They must have been really stupid back then).

One possible path is to examine the legality of the 14th, and the other Amendments passed under the Chase Court 1860-1872. They contradictory rulings of that farce of a Court are many, no surprise given it was the most corrupt and crooked Court in our history.

I'd have to do a lot of research to even comment on that.


.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Because states cannot ignore the US Constitution or the 2nd amendment. States also cannot take away your right to free speech or force a religion on you.

Actually, they could.

After ratification, several states had state supported religions.

They were never challenged by the Federal Government.

They were long gone when the 14th was ratified.


.

But not because they were challenged.

The states themselves chose to write them out.

Clarence Thomas recently hinted that such support today would be constitutional.

Considering current case law I would seriously doubt that.


.

Case law changes every time the Court replaces Judges. Most of the time, anyway. It will certainly change wit the next two Trump appointments.

Let's hope so !!!!!!

May Ginsburg keel over tomorrow if not tonight.

The left is terrified of another Roe case. The know there is a good chance it gets overturned. Now then it returns to the states where most will pass laws allowing abortions (we really are morally bankrupt). But states like Kansas would be free to shut them down.

The right has been quitely hemming in Roe with small state laws that make it harder....

The left won't challenge them because they are worried it will get to the SCOTUS.

 

[Vastator]

Why can't my state take my guns away ?

They can. And it would be much easier than many think. Simply make every crime in the state punishable by up to one year, and one days incarceration. That would make those people Felons. Then they couldn't own guns. They wouldn't even have to serve such a sentence. The crime for which they've been convicted only has to have the potential for such a sentence. Boom felon! A state could make speeding a Felony if it wanted to. There are no federal guidelines as to how a state may decide what is a felony, and what isnt. That's up to the state. However... If one state says your a felon; all other states must legally concur. It's a very flawed system.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

My state Constitution says the Right to Keep, and Bear Arms shall NOT BE QUESTIONED.

Thank You !!!!!

I feel that is probably the correct answer.

An appeal to the 2nd is an appeal to a fallacy absent incorporation (which sucks and is somehow derived from the 14th amendment in an ambiguous fashion....14th passed around 1865....incorporation started sometime in the early 1930's. They must have been really stupid back then).

One possible path is to examine the legality of the 14th, and the other Amendments passed under the Chase Court 1860-1872. They contradictory rulings of that farce of a Court are many, no surprise given it was the most corrupt and crooked Court in our history.

Have you ever read about the passage of the 14th ?

By itself, it is pretty disgusting.

The Squalid 14th Amendment - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why can't my state take my guns away ?

They can. And it would be much easier than many think. Simply make every crime in the state punishable by up to one year, and one days incarceration. That would make those people Felons. Then they couldn't own guns. They wouldn't even have to serve such a sentence. The crime for which they've been convicted only has to have the potential for such a sentence. Boom felon! A state could make speeding a Felony if it wanted to. There are no federal guidelines as to how a state may decide what is a felony, and what isnt. That's up to the state. However... If one state says your a felon; all other states must legally concur. It's a very flawed system.

Interesting.