Civil Liberties

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)

9. Matrix-worthy dodge there.

Wed Mar 11, 2015, 08:37 PM

Mar 2015

Keanu's got nothing on you.

So, do you actually admit that all the 'themselves and' .. means that the right was individual in scope? ie, for protecting oneself among other reasons?

Or do you think that only *some* states thought of it as an individual right (e.g. Tennessee) while others thought of it as a collective right? Seems a bit of a stretch, especially when you check the early jurisprudence in some of those states.

*gasp* By jove, I think he's almost got it.

Home, person, and property indeed.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

13 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Madison: Federalist No. 46, on the makeup of the militia: [View all] NYC_SKP Feb 2015 OP

Jefferson may be better exemplar. He didn't like standing armies. Panich52 Feb 2015 #1

articles of confederation (x post) jimmy the one Feb 2015 #2

Seems pretty straightforward to me. X_Digger Feb 2015 #3

He mentions 500,000 militia members at a time when the total U.S. population was under 4 million. NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #4

1790 census & madison's dream jimmy the one Mar 2015 #5

state constitutions circa 1787 jimmy the one Mar 2015 #6

Conjunction junction, what's your function? X_Digger Mar 2015 #7

Gee, if ccw was an individual right jimmy the one Mar 2015 #8

Matrix-worthy dodge there. X_Digger Mar 2015 #9

digger's pseudo realism jimmy the one Mar 2015 #10

You're coming at the bill of rights almost as a 'grants' document.. which is bullshit. X_Digger Mar 2015 #11

glad to oblige jimmy the one Mar 2015 #12

Well if the ACLU says so, it must be true, right (appeal to authority.) X_Digger Mar 2015 #13