Guns a collective or individual right?

Yes, but the Officers of the Corporation were directly responsible to pay fines, judgements and/or gaeol-time
Click to expand...

Still are...can you imagine Kozlowski in Newgate?

WildnownextyouwillpointouthedifferencebetweenactsofthecorporationleadingtocriminalliabilityvisavisindivdualactsofacorporateofficerleadingtocriminalliabilitybutirecallddistinclyaQBcasefromtheearly19thcentrurightonthispointhowboutthisforasigAlaska
 
No... Next I will point out that WE (both of us) are straying severely off topic, and I will be forced to close the thread, on myself.
 
The "States' Righter" View

When they meant the Unified or National government, they always used the word, government. When they meant states, they used that word. When they meant the individual, singly or collectively as a whole, they used the word, people.
Click to expand...
In my view, the US Constitution does not create a Unified or National government but rather a limited federal government. And the US is not a collective of people, it is fifty collectives of people or "States". "People" and "States" often mean the same thing to me. In the Virginia Ratification Convention, Madison explained that when the US Constitution begins "We the People", it means "the people as fifty sovereignties", which to me is "the States". And in his Report on the Virginia Resolutions, Madison explained about the word "States":

"It is indeed true that the term "states" is sometimes used in a vague sense, and sometimes in different senses, according to the subject to which it is applied. Thus it sometimes means the separate sections of territory occupied by the political societies within each; sometimes the particular governments established by those societies; sometimes those societies as organized into those particular governments; and lastly, it means the people composing those political societies, in their highest sovereign capacity".



When they talked about "rights," it was always in reference to the people. Whenever they talked about the government or the states, the word used was, power. Less often, authority.
Click to expand...

The Declaration of Independence said that each Colony had a right to be a free and independent State (i.e. Virginians have a collective right to control Virginia). When the States formed the US, the Second Article of Confederation declared that each State was retaining its rights. Federalist Paper #31 mentions the rights of the Union and the rights of the State governments. And when the US Constitution was proposed to the States, the main issue was a States' Rights Amendment, our Tenth Amendment, which declares that undelegated powers/rights/jurisdiction/sovereignty are reserved to each individual State or to the people of that individual State i.e. people = State. Here are some of the State's requests for amendment:

NC - "I. THAT each state in the union shall, respectively, retain every power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by this constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States, or to the departments of the Federal Government."

NY - "that every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the Government thereof, remains to the People of the several States, or to their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same"

RI - "That the rights of the States respectively, to nominate and appoint all State Officers, and every other power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States or to the departments of government thereof, remain to the people of the several states, or their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same"

VA - "First, That each State in the Union shall respectively retain every power, jurisdiction and right which is not by this Constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States or to the departments of the Federal Government."

Virginia ratified the US Constitution with the belief that our request for Amendment would be respected. To me, it's just not proper to spin the Bill of Rights such that it tramples the Tenth Amendment, it's just not right to read the Bill of Rights and conclude that States don't have rights, when the main point of amendment was to clarify that they do have rights.
 
Hugh, you are correct about the States being free and independent sovereigns when the Declaration was signed.

But when the Articles were signed, some of that sovereignty was given up. When the Confederation was abolished and the Constitution ratified, even more of that sovereignty was given up. The States have not been completely sovereign ever since that time.

You are correct that the federal government created by the Constitution was not meant to be a "National" government. Technically, I was wrong to use that phrase. Yet it is what it is - Now. The term, Unified, was the proper term, however.

You are incorrect about the meaning of "We the People," however. The Constitution was to be ratified by Conventions of the States and not by the States themselves. Thus, the preamble was written to endorse this fact. The people in those conventions essentially nullified the Confederation and by their will, nullified whatever ties their state governments had to the Confederation in favor of the government created by the Constitution.

Despite your contention that people=state, this is just not so. The powers not delegated to the government by the Constitution were reserved to the States or the people... meaning that if the powers were within the State Constitutions or Charters, then that power belonged to that State. If the power was not to be found in either the federal or state constitutions, then that power was reserved to the people themselves. It may sound the same, but it is quite different.

And lastly, despite what the ratifying documents requested, the states, by convention, ratified the Constitution regardless. At that point, the Federal Government was created and did not have to honor those requests. Those are the facts. It was only because Madison felt duty bound to honor his word, that he proposed the Bill of Rights in the first session of the first Congress, despite the objections of every other congressman there. And yes, they all objected. But Madison was dogged about his proposal and won the concession.

Hugh, we can argue both of our positions. I know you feel strongly about your views, just as I feel strongly about mine. We've done this before, elsewhere. Shall we just agree to disagree? Can we agree that our rights, for the most part, pre-date the Union and therefore the Bill of Rights do not create the rights but only acknowledge them?
 
Whose rights are we talking about?

None, NONE, NONE , N O N E of the rights protected for us by the Constitution (i.e., #s 1 thru 10 ) are collective rights. They are all individual rights. God gave them, our wise christian founding fathers enumerated and enforced them, and WE use them. And if / when necessary we will protect them in the way prescribed in the constitution, using armed force if needs be.
 
God gave them, our wise christian founding fathers enumerated and enforced them, and WE use them. And if / when necessary we will protect them in the way prescribed in the constitution, using armed force if needs be.
Click to expand...

God didnt give me any rights, Im an athiest :)

Several of the wise founding fathers werent Christian either :D :p

WildlookslikethisoneisoversoonAlaska
 
Has anyone told you, lately, that you are such a toublemaker?
Click to expand...
Lately? Just the wife and the boss. ;)

I don't remember who gave me my rights. Come to think of it, I'm not exactly sure where I put them! :eek:
 
You are incorrect about the meaning of "We the People," however. The Constitution was to be ratified by Conventions of the States and not by the States themselves.
Click to expand...
Many people think "we the people" means the people of the US as one collective i.e. a "popular vote". My point is that the source of power in the US is the people as fifty collectives which is to say the States - no, not the State governments, but rather the people as fifty collectives.

However, any additional delegation of federal powers must properly be done by amending the US Constitution, and amendments may be ratified either by State Conventions or by the State Legislatures.


Despite your contention that people=state, this is just not so. The powers not delegated to the government by the Constitution were reserved to the States or the people... meaning that if the powers were within the State Constitutions or Charters, then that power belonged to that State. If the power was not to be found in either the federal or state constitutions, then that power was reserved to the people themselves.
Click to expand...
Many people think that the Tenth Amendment reserves powers to the people of the US, but that turns the amendment against itself. The Tenth Amendment was intended to clarify that undelegated powers remain with the States, which may mean the State Legislatures or it may mean the people of a State - powers are reserved to the States or to the people thereof.

I am not aware of any State having requested an amendment which said that undelegated powers are reserved to each individual State or else to the people of the whole US, nor would such a request seem to make any sense.



Can we agree that our rights, for the most part, pre-date the Union and therefore the Bill of Rights do not create the rights but only acknowledge them?
Click to expand...
I think you're still trying to say that the US BOR is an enumeration of our individual/civil rights but that is an extremist 14th "Amendment" view which I do not agree with at all. Civil rights were intended to vary from State to State. The US BOR was intended to limit the federal government.
 
Lets not confuse what WE THINK the founding fathers wrote with what the Courts, after a careful anaylis based on well settled priciples, say they wrote
Click to expand...
What "careful analysis" ? You're being sarcastic, right ?
 
Hugh said:
However, any additional delegation of federal powers must properly be done by amending the US Constitution, and amendments may be ratified either by State Conventions or by the State Legislatures.
Click to expand...
That is the way it should be. The extension of powers (commerce clause and necessary and proper clause) should not come about by judicial fiat, as they have been done. This would be an example of an "informal" amendment that is open to re-interpretation or further expansion by another Court. Yet, there is nothing in the Constitution to support this view.

I would note too, that we have never had amendments proposed by the second method, that is, by State Conventions. Considering the one time history (the Articles were "changed" in this manner) of such, it is probably a good thing.

The Tenth Amendment was intended to clarify that undelegated powers remain with the States, which may mean the State Legislatures or it may mean the people of a State - powers are reserved to the States or to the people thereof.
Click to expand...
Actually, no. The Tenth says exactly what it means, as it uses both terms, the States and the People. The Tenth is referring to Powers, not Rights. It says that any Power not enumerated (delegated) by the Constitution, nor forbidden to the States by that Constitution are therefore reserved to the States (according to their individual constitutions) or to the People (if not in the States constitutions).

There was a very real fear (one in which we've seen come true) that the Federal Government would try to grow more powerfull and claim other powers not listed. The Tenth was supposed to stop this. And it would have, if the Court had done its duty. What the Tenth says, of federal power, what is not enumerated is forbidden. From our perspective, the Court has utterly failed to uphold this principle.

I think you're still trying to say that the US BOR is an enumeration of our individual/civil rights but that is an extremist 14th "Amendment" view which I do not agree with at all.
Click to expand...
No, that is not what I wrote. Nor is that my meaning at all.

The Bill of Rights listed (enumerated) what the Framers considered the most important rights that the federal government was restricted from abrogating or abusing. It did not list every right (see the Ninth Amendment).

What is needed today is to go back to seeing the Constitution as it was seen by the Framers. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights were restrictions placed upon the general government. They were not restrictions placed upon the States or the People.

As for my "extremist" view of the 14th... Go find in the annuals of congress, the arguments for and against the proposal of the 14th. Then come back and tell my the Court was right in the Slaughterhouse Cases and my view is wrong.

I'll be waiting...
 
You want an extremist view?

I think that all members of the federal government should be drafted (literally) from that portion of the general population with an IQ of 100 or more. No previous experience or further testing allowed. They should be drafted for a period of one year. While doing this duty they should be kept in uninsulated or temperature conditioned quonset huts and fed marginally better than residents of Aushwitz (sp?). At the end of their term, if they show any enthusiasm for their time of service they should be caned. If they volunteer to serve another term they should be branded on the forehead with some symbol and common citizens can kill them at their own discretion on sight, as long as they use only their bare hands to avoid collateral injury to desireable members of society. Like murderers and child rapists.

The President and members of the SCOUSA should be reduced to two year terms and deported for life to middle eastern brothels and salt mines after completion of their terms.

I'll get around to deciding the terms of service for state and local governments eventually.
 
The Tenth Amendment is the "States' Rights Amendment"

Following are the requests for the Tenth Amendment, and not one of them declares that undelegated powers are reserved to the people of the whole US. Every one of them is requesting an amendment clarifying that undelegated powers are reserved to each individual State, either the State Legislature or the people of that individual State. If I am wrong about the Tenth Amendment, then it would seem that the States were also wrong in their requests:

**********************************************

MA - "First, That it be explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly delegated by the aforesaid Constitution are reserved to the several States to be by them exercised."

NC - "I. THAT each state in the union shall, respectively, retain every power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by this constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States, or to the departments of the Federal Government."

NH - "First That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid Constitution are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised."

NY - "that every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the Government thereof, remains to the People of the several States, or to their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same"

RI - "That the rights of the States respectively, to nominate and appoint all State Officers, and every other power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States or to the departments of government thereof, remain to the people of the several states, or their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same"

SC - "This Convention doth also declare that no Section or paragraph of the said Constitution warrants a Construction that the states do not retain every power not expressly relinquished by them and vested in the General Government of the Union."

VA - "First, That each State in the Union shall respectively retain every power, jurisdiction and right which is not by this Constitution delegated to the Congress of the United States or to the departments of the Federal Government."

**********************************************
 
"The People" means "The People," not the National Guard

The Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which were ratified in 1787, did not refer to the National Guard in the Second Amendment.

The National Guard was not in exsistence until 130 years later.

How could the Founders have been refering to something that did not exsist and that they had no knowledge of??

They couldn't have been, that's how. :D

There is also a federal law that defines the Militia as "anyone over the age of 17 years."
 
NY - "that every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said Constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States, or the departments of the Government thereof, remains to the People of the several States, or to their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same"

RI - "That the rights of the States respectively, to nominate and appoint all State Officers, and every other power, jurisdiction and right, which is not by the said constitution clearly delegated to the Congress of the United States or to the departments of government thereof, remain to the people of the several states, or their respective State Governments to whom they may have granted the same"

Hugh, look at what I've underlined. Both NY and RI said the same thing the 10th says, only in more words. They are saying the same thing I said.

I think at this point hugh, we are talking at cross purposes.
 
I was enjoying this discussion while I understood most of it, but...

not one of them declares that undelegated powers are reserved to the people of the whole US.
Click to expand...
What is the significance of the distinction you are making, Hugh? The people of the several states are the people of the whole US, are they not? E pluribus unum. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top