How Judges Ignore the Constitution on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms

How Judges Ignore the Constitution on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms Moussa81, iStock-1006474816
How Judges Ignore the Constitution on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms, iStock-1006474816

U.S.A.-(Ammoland.com)- For the last 50 years, I have been hearing or reading versions of this argument:

The Second Amendment is clear. All we have to do is bring a case before the court(s) and we win. Why doesn't the NRA, local lawyer, local defendant or whoever, just push a case forward? The law is clear!

When I was young and naive, I wondered the same thing. Why wasn't the NRA bringing a Second Amendment case before the courts, and specifically, to the Supreme Court?

A more general question is: How do judges routinely escape consequences when violating their oaths of office; when implementing their preferred policy instead of enforcing the law? How are they able to escape consequences when they do this instead of enforcing the U.S. Constitution and state constitutional protections of the right to keep and bear arms?

Men are not perfect. Men will always be tempted to abuse power. Men will always be tempted to accumulate power for their personal benefit. If men were perfect, we would not need government. Because they are not perfect, we need limits on governmental power.

The designers and writers of the Constitution set up a system to limit governmental powers through checks and balances inside and outside the government.  The legislature has the power to set up courts and impeach judges; the President has the power to appoint judges; Judges have the power to judge cases, which involves an intrinsic ability to interpret the law, as written by the legislature.

In addition to internal governmental checks and balances, the writers of the Constitution depended on the people to limit governmental power through elections and by petitioning the government, informed by a free press and freedom of speech. That depended on people's understanding the governmental processes and having a common understanding of natural law and Judeo-Christian moral law. Public outrage can result in a check on judges who put their political preferences above the law. A final check against tyranny was the right to keep and bear arms.

An insidious ideology undermining of all these concepts crept into the United States about 1900, though it had beginnings much earlier, and has always had a following.  It was the philosophy known as Progressivism, or more generally Leftism. Secular Humanism contains many of its elements.

Two of the main differences in Progressive philosophy are: man is perfectible, not limited; man is unconstrained by outside forces, either God or nature.  Progressivism is, essentially, a religion which substitutes the government for God.

In a brilliant address to the Federalist Society, Attorney General William Barr explained the disadvantages Conservatives have in a contest with Progressives:

In any age, the so-called progressives treat politics as their religion. Their holy mission is to use the coercive power of the State to remake man and society in their own image, according to an abstract ideal of perfection. Whatever means they use are therefore justified because, by definition, they are a virtuous people pursing a deific end. They are willing to use any means necessary to gain momentary advantage in achieving their end, regardless of collateral consequences and the systemic implications. They never ask whether the actions they take could be justified as a general rule of conduct, equally applicable to all sides.

Conservatives, on the other hand, do not seek an earthly paradise. We are interested in preserving over the long run the proper balance of freedom and order necessary for healthy development of natural civil society and individual human flourishing. This means that we naturally test the propriety and wisdom of action under a “rule of law” standard. The essence of this standard is to ask what the overall impact on society over the long run if the action we are taking, or principle we are applying, in a given circumstance was universalized – that is, would it be good for society over the long haul if this was done in all like circumstances?

For these reasons, conservatives tend to have more scruple over their political tactics and rarely feel that the ends justify the means. And this is as it should be, but there is no getting around the fact that this puts conservatives at a disadvantage when facing progressive holy war, especially when doing so under the weight of a hyper-partisan media.

Progressive ideology has been accepted by most of the knowledge elites in the United States for decades. It has taken over academia, particularly the “elite” colleges. It has taken over the mass media for 50 years or more. It has taken over almost all the educational establishment, and most of the entertainment industry. Here are some key Progressive themes:

  • Man is not limited by God.
  • There is no absolute right or wrong.
  • Limits on government power are bad.
  • Rule by administrators is better than rule by representatives
  • Policy should be made by experts, not politicians
  • The elite have the right and duty to rule.
  • The elite have the right and duty to create public opinion and control the flow of information.

One of the most pernicious ideas promoted by Progressives is the concept of a “living Constitution”. This eliminates effective Constitutional restraints on government.  Judges are to implement Progressive policy preferences that exist at the time the ruling is made. Those preferences change with time and whim.

Conservatives or originalists believe the Constitutional law should only be changed by the amendment process.

When originalists talk about a case, they talk about the law and the intent of the law; when Progressives talk about a case, they talk about outcomes. If a particular outcome is not what a Progressive wants, they feel free to change the law with judicial rulings.

The Progressive agenda is fluid and changeable, dependent on what is in vogue with the knowledge elites at the moment.

100 years ago, promoting racism against blacks was a prime part of the Progressive agenda. 50 years ago a colorblind society was a Progressive value. Now, anti-white racism seems to be a prime Progressive value. 50 years ago, the First Amendment was favored by Progressives, because it empowered the knowledge elite. Now it is out of favor, because it fractures the power of the knowledge elite. At any time, the Progressive agenda is aimed at concentrating more and more power in the hands of the elite.

In the American judicial system, Judges are to follow the law fairly and impartially, with reference to the written law and deference to the legislature. They are *not* to create their own law, or to work to advance a particular agenda, or to advantage or disadvantage particular groups. When they create law contrary to the U.S. Constitution or state constitutions, they violate their oaths. When they advance a political agenda by their selective interpretation of law, they violate their oaths.

Judges should not invalidate law because of the outcome of the law. They should only invalidate law if a particular law violates basic principles of law or Constitutional principles.

Progressive theory holds that judges should always judge the law by the outcome of the law, in particular, as it affects the Progressive agenda. This makes judges into super-legislators, or worse, tyrants.

Most judges, in ordinary cases, do not have the ability to change law. Judges and justices change the law in appellate courts and supreme courts in the states and the federal system.

Honorable people expect judges to be constrained by their oaths; judges who subscribe to Progressive ideology do not believe oaths should be adhered to, if they interfere with the Progressive agenda. Progressive ideology considers oaths to be mere superstition, if not backed up by the ability of someone to enforce them.

Honorable people expect judges to be constrained by moral outrage; but the people are informed by the Progressive media. The people are told the judges are doing what is right and correct, because it advances the Progressive agenda.

Honorable people expect the legislature to impeach judges who violate their oaths. Most of the legislature has been accepting Progressive premises for 40-50 years or longer. Those who have not accepted Progressive premises are fearful of the outrage of the Progressive media.

A short and incomplete list of the legacy (progressive) media is the New York Times, AP, the Washington Post, The LA Times, ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and many more.

Image how different appellate and supreme court decisions would be if the legacy (progressive) media consistently and routinely castigated judges for violating their oath of office. Image how different the decisions would be if the legacy (progressive) media called for judges who violated their oaths to be impeached.

What would have happened with Justice Ginsburg if the legacy (progressive) media had claimed she was as much a threat to the Republic as they have claimed President Trump is a threat?

Instead, the legacy (progressive) media have consistently promoted Progressive ideology.

The checks and balances of the Constitution have been disabled, undercut, and broken as Progressive ideology became the ideology of the elite in our educational and media institutions.

We have judges who ignore the Constitution because they do not see the Constitution as any real constraint; they do not see their oath as to any real constraint; they do not believe in objective reality, honor, or truth.  They believe in the Progressive agenda.

It is easier for a population to change its elite than it is for the elite to change their population.

In the U.S. Constitutional system, there is a remedy. The remedy is to elect a President who appoints the judges, a President who will appoint individuals who have shown they respect the Constitution, who respect the rule of law.  Those individuals must have honor and integrity. By definition, this rules out judges who value Progressives ideology above truth or honor.

President Donald Trump is appointing a record number of Article III judges. Article III judges are those in the federal district and circuit courts, and at the Supreme Court. He has appointed 160 out of 870 Article III judges so far. He will likely appoint another 40 during his first term. He may appoint another 100 during his second term. That would be 320, or 37% of all the Article III judges. There are already some judges on the bench who are originalists and textualists. Originalists and textualists cannot be ideological Progressives, without constant conflicts in guiding principles.

When a clear majority of the Supreme Court Justices are originalists and textualists, and a majority of Article III judges are originalists and textualists, we will have a chance of obtaining consistent Constitutional decisions from the courts.

It is not enough. It is important to break the Progressive ideological stranglehold on the information flow in society. It has to be broken, so honorable judges are honored, dishonorable judges are dishonored, and legislators are not in constant fear of a dishonorable Media elite.

President Trump is in office because the Progressive media is losing its grip on the information flow in American society. As it loses its grip, legislators will be less fearful; the population will be better informed, and the checks and balances in the American Constitutional system will work better.

As Progressive judges are replaced with honorable judges, an expectation of judicial rulings consistent with the Constitution will no longer be naive.

No elite gives up power willingly. The media elite are fighting to keep their power with all their might.


About Dean Weingarten:Dean Weingarten

Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of constitutional carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and recently retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.

106
Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
21 Comment threads
85 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
23 Comment authors
donfrankoBpjsurfOldvetStWayneHeed the Call-up Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Bpjsurf
Admin

So there was talk of random reckless down voting in this post / comment. If you are following this post this information is for you. We modified voting so that only commenters who login to the comment system can vote. No more anonymous down voting shall be allowed. Also there is a certain some one who has violated comment policy conducting ad hominem attacks on other commenters. This behavior is not allowed. If you are a curious fellow who was seeking out that certain commentor who seems to be changing the commentor name from, not*****, to whit**** and then none*****… Read more »

donfranko
Member
donfranko

Another excellent article outlining the truth of what we face in America today. Pres. Trump will need another term, and then at least one more term for a conservative president, maybe Pence, to turn the tide back toward a constitutional republic as our founders dreamed of. We CAN do this. We MUST stand strong, stand together, and be courageous. It’s the only way to accomplish this goal. Thank you Dean for your inspirations.

God bless our troops, vets, and law officers.

Graystone
Member
Graystone

Mr. Weingarten
Your article is, perhaps, one of the BEST conservative vs. progressive arguments I have ever had the pleasure of reading on Ammoland.
You, Sir, are worthy of a salute for stating as clearly, in an uncomplicated, easy to understand, and in plain English an explanation that everyone reading your article should be able to grasp.
Thank you for your contribution and for unabashedly and boldly bringing to light the truth.

Accountability365
Member
Accountability365

Judical accountability perhaps should apply the concept of the “reasonably prudent man ” when applying the laws of the USA to control / set a side rulings that are based upon personal politics or permuted interpretations of law as written.

CourageousLion
Member
CourageousLion

“Our” government was usurped with the Dick Act in 1903 that created for all intents the National Guard and that was when they quit supporting state militias, doing away with the first 13 words of the 2nd amendment. Then in 1913 they passed the Federal Reserve act taking the monetary power away from we the people. They started implementing back in the late 1800’s the 10th plank of the Communist manifest which is “Free” education for all children in government schools.When you start putting all of THESE usurpation’s together you end up with the REASON…Another consideration is the lie that… Read more »

StWayne
Member
StWayne

There’s a lot to unpack in what you said. The lynch you speak of was when the government took us off the gold system, and into a fiat one. This means that they can print all the money they want, for whatever reason they want, bearing no accountability. There’s nothing “fed” about the Federal Reserve, as it’s a privately owned financial institution accountable to absolutely no one but themselves. It was created in 1913 by the Congress for reasons they say was to instill “safety” within the financial system, which of course is a load of BS designed to further… Read more »

Greg K
Member
Greg K

It has come to my attention that sometimes we get our cart ahead of the horse. Who has time to truly study, let alone understand the Constitution. There’s yet another Greg Bill argument down below. Go read it if you like, but I am asking you all to read “Sovereign Duty” by Kris Anne Hall. Here’s an excerpt from another one of her books…”Liberty First” also by Kris Anne Hall (pgs 26-27.) “We must remember that lawyers are simply college graduates who have passed the bar,and judges are those graduates who have gotten a promotion. Unless any of those students… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Did you challenge your auto shop teacher’s BS with your superior knowledge, too? Did you challenge your algebra teacher’s BS? And your wood shop teacher’s BS.
You read one book by one author and you are an instant expert! We have seen your type before. I bet that all your classmates surrounded you with praise and heaped adulation upon you? And I bet that you didn’t pass the class.

Oldmarine
Member
Oldmarine

Judges can be held responsible when they violate the Supreme Courts decision of 1803 that ” Any law repugnant to the Constitution is NULL and VOID ” In other words an Illegal law same as a Criminal act.
If you see a judge break the law just place charges against him and let him answer in court.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@OM, Federal judges or state judges? Where do you get that being held responsible theory? Do you think that one would find a prosecutor that would bring charges?

Captain Witold Pilecki
Member

“A more general question is: How do judges routinely escape consequences when violating their oaths of office; when implementing their preferred policy instead of enforcing the law?”

Only when the free citizens of this country wake up and use their God-given rights to drag the traitors from their seats of “power,” and then hang them for being the traitors they are. THAT’S when those that are elected or appointed will stick to their oaths and follow The Constitution!

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@WP, Yes, or the free citizens of this country could elect a Congress that will do its job and impeach the betraying judges. But I am not opposed to rope. Either is fine.

CourageousLion
Member
CourageousLion

And the choice while voting is what? Twiddle dee or Twiddle dumb over and over and over and over.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@CL, The key is the primary elections. If we can primary select an other than the party hack, the party would be stuck with him and the choice would be “the not corrupted yet” candidate over Twiddle dumb.

donfranko
Member
donfranko

Pres. Trump stood against 10 other republicans, and WON. It can be done.

StWayne
Member
StWayne

Judges routinely escape consequence because they are protected: same as mob bosses. To wake this country up first requires that those “laws” they pass directly affect the people, even right down to the individual, or it goes unnoticed. If America ever does wake up, they will see that those elected to office on their behalf more times than “knot,” bring their own rope to the party.

StWayne
Member
StWayne

Mr. Dean Weingarten, this is your finest work! I knew of the things you wrote about, but had a different approach to their understanding that you, thankfully, brought to the next level by digging even deeper. I have posted this before, and are the actual tenets of the Democratic Party: (1) “People are asked to vote their leaders who have no responsibility and or accountability to the progress or failures of their countries.” (2) “If the voters are unhappy with the elected leaders, they have to wait it out for the remaining years to elect other leaders who have no… Read more »

Lakefoot
Member
Lakefoot

Dean, your writing is excellent, as is this article.

Regarding downvotes, I do that. Sometimes my downvote seems like enough effort as the reason for it is the associated post doesn’t deserve more. Name calling and insults aren’t very effective at conveying a message.

With that said, I enjoy learning from some of you out there. To those- thank you for your thoughts,

Geary
Member
Geary

This isn’t just judges ignoring the Constitution, look at the Legislature. From the bottom to the top, progressives have tried to dismantle it.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@Geary, It is the parties. Once the party hack wins the primary election, then the party hack will be the party candidate. If we can arrange for the “not corrupted yet” candidate to win the primary, then the party is stuck with the non-hack.

Deplorable Bill
Member
Deplorable Bill

We did. His name is Trump.

Arm up, carry on.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@DP, Boy howdy! Go Trump! We have to send him some help to restore the republic, though. Only we can drain the legislative swamp.

MikeRoss
Member
MikeRoss

Outstanding article.

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

I’ve been around since about 2004. But the stuff/people backing out of the sewer here these days is worse than what’s been done to Pres. Trump. Drain the swamp is an understatement.
It will stop! No pun intended Will(imena)/U Sucking Azzhat!.

Stuck in Commie Ct
Member
Stuck in Commie Ct

An excellent and informative read, thank you sir.

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

You are right a very good write up on the 2A state of affairs.

joefoam
Member
joefoam

Judges are given way too much room and respect in my opinion. From the robes to the ceremonies in their courtrooms, I find it all too cultish. We need a rule that if judges opinions continue to be overturned then they should be unseated.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@joe, Yep, federal judges sit for a period of good behavior or life. Legislating from the bench and violating their oath to uphold the constitution is not good behavior.
As Mr. Weingarten points out Congress should be doing its job and impeach them. I guess that it is up to us to elect a Congress that will do its job.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@Dean Weingarten, Excellent article! I would like to recommend to you, if I may, Woodrow Wilson and the roots of Modern Liberalism by Ronald J. Pestritto. Then again, you may have read it already!

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Really a down vote for recommending a book? Now, who would be opposed to reading? The Face book types, Nazi book burners, the democrat party, a secret society of anti-librarians?

MikeRoss
Member
MikeRoss

That is odd. I can’t imagine many Woodrow Wilson are fans reading Ammoland, First fascist national leader of the 20th Century.

Tionico
Member
Tionico

Judging ONLY from the title of the book, it may well be the tome intends to demonstrate that Wilson IS one of the gatekeepers who has let in the nasty tide of liberalism, fascism, indeed, the very things Dean so well exposes as the root of the problem today.

Maybe YOU should get and read the recommended work…..

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@Mike, The author, Ronald J. Pestritto, is neither fan nor detractor of WW. Just the facts, man, just the facts.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@USA, I’m old fashioned and slow. I need a subject and a verb, please.

Will
Member
Will

I’ve often wondered what happened to Chief Justice John Roberts. Why would a formerly highly respected and honorable man,turn into a Progressive,Traitor POS ? Not only has he betrayed his oath of office,but he has betrayed the Constitution of the United States and the citizens of this country !

Tionico
Member
Tionico

MY personal take on that “opinion” of his in the OhBummerTax case is that somehow somewhere someone has dirt on him and has essentially blackmailed him into compliance. There is one aspect of his opinion and resultant ruling: by declaring it a tax (when we ALL know it is not) he left a door open that is wide enough to drive a Boeing 747 through…. ALL taxes can ONLY originate in one of the two chambers of COngress (can’t remember for sure which one) to be lawful. OhBummerTax rose up in the OTHER, or WRONG, house. WHY has not anyone… Read more »

Deplorable Bill
Member
Deplorable Bill

You do understand this is about Mystery Babylon which is U.S. Look closely at the statue of liberty, the crown on her head, her right hand etc. Also there is the part where it is destroyed in a single day and the city in a single hour. The good news is we are long gone by then. But, until HE comes to call us up, arm up, carry on.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@USA, Where have you been all day?

Deplorable Bill
Member
Deplorable Bill

Good job Dean. I believe that America is nearly at the point of no return. I truly believe this nation is founded upon sound, righteous Judeo/Christian laws, precepts, mandates, commandments. Because we are founded in this way our nation has prospered. Think what a world this would be if everyone, in all nations, lived the ten commandments. How about the top two commandments? What a world this would be. If you view Scripture as historical fact as I do, you will have no trouble finding what happens to people, cities, states and nations that turn their back on the LORD… Read more »

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Am starting over…
Barron ex rel. Tiernan v. Mayor of Baltimore, 7 Pet. 243 (1833) <–This allowed for the Constitution to only be applied Federally.
Wickard v. Filburn, 317 U.S. 111 (1942) <–This allowed the regulatory agencies "Title of Nobility" to make their own punitive regulations as they saw fit.
"Administrative Procedures Act of 1947" <–This was supposed to cool the naysayers of the anti bureaucracy crowd.
All this set sail to the Filth that Dean has illuminated.

Tionico
Member
Tionico

What about the unfair and illegal tariff structure imposed upon the southern, agricultural states through the early-mid ninteenth century, leading directly to the economically damaged southern states to nullify many of those tariffs to survive economically, then to the blockades imposed by the northern states, next to the seizing of some of the territory of one of the soveriegn states of the newly formed Confederate States, next the false flag operation and the “firing” on Fort SUmpter, the den of pirates harrying Confederate shipping off the coast, and the “excuse” for Lincoln to declare “war” on the soveriegn nation to… Read more »

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

Back in 1963, when the democrats got really deep in bed with the communists, the Supreme Court got its orders: You WILL support the democrat party in its anti-American activities……or else”. That year, the SCOTUS ruled it was illegal to bring a Holy Bible to school or any federal building. Prayer and referring to gospel in school and federal buildings were crimes. SCOTUS claimed it was “separation of church & state” which is NOWHERE in the Constitution. SCOTUS followed the Communist Manifesto: 1. Remove God from everywhere. 2. Destroy the traditions and morals of the country you are making communist.… Read more »

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

Yet, again, the snivelling coward down votes and runs away, crying, too cowardly to post a rebuttal or even a reason for a down vote.
It is to laugh.

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

What? Merely ONE down vote? I’ve been robbed!
It must have been past the bedtime of these democrat lurkers who slash a quick down vote then run away, crying.

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

@Tetejuan: It was action was over BS and cowardice. I’ve voted good comments by you and others to only watch them instantaneously go down. Then I observed some obvious patterns. My goal was to end it. Hopefully it will become even less easier to try and manipulate opinions and comments here by any one person or persons in the future. I consider their actions despicable and no better than what the socialists have been doing in America just before Trump became President. I’ve voted your three comments above up to atleast -1, -1 and -2. We’ll see? I’d really hate… Read more »

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

Who the fuck is Rev you cocksucking inbred slime that ran down mama’s leg????? Yes! That means you suck daddy’d dick, brother’s dick, granddad’s dick… well you get the picture.
My former screenname was >>>Nottinghill<<<. Ask WB, TC, GMB, Vanns40. You piss-ant!!! You little fucking turd are new around these parts have pissed offed the wrong swing dick.
Your on my list too. Your mama, daddy well you get that too!!!!!
They slink down their mamm's legs down too!!!!!
You and your other multi-headed personalities should get off your lazy cowardly fat asses and go back through the timeline and do some researching.

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

It’s a shit list on you. A list of the worms, slug and blood sucking leeches. in your family tree. Why? Do you want to make something of it coward?

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

Doeas that USA stand for Ugly Sucking Azzhat… squirt! Hmmm wetspot???
Where’s your buttholing girlfriend Will(imena)?

Oldmarine
Member
Oldmarine

A very impressive display of Stupidly a lack of ability to respond in a normal manner. Loosing you temper at printed works tops the LIST of emotionally immature spoiled brat reactions.
There are lots of LISTS and I’m sure you are on one of those list also. ” what goes around comes around ” Enjoy life while you can for we all die in the end.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@USA, You should not be concerned. Those people get down voted because of their poor manners, specious facts, and weird theories.

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

@Wild Billy Jean King: Now you should know better! Is the Used Shit Asswipe who thinks I’m Rev , I’m guessing TheRevelator who was a good posting buddy of yours and TC. Did you all turncoat on him or something. Haven’t seen around him around these parts. Were you not and I know where the posts are a big savior for the NRA?
Couldn’t post for some weeks came back to this mess of a creation. Also I’m thinking you’re one of the multi-heads.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@White, I should know better than what? Yep, I enjoyed Rev’s logical approach, but did not agree with all of his facts or conclusions. And I still do.
I was not a big savior for the NRA. You must be thinking of someone else. But for full disclosure, you should know that I am a Benefactor Life Member.
And finally, nope, I have only one account and only one nome de guerre, the same one as be for the program changes.

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

U Shitty Asswipe should be concern after my coffee works in. Out you go flushed down the bowl. Shouldn’t wipes be concerned about that?

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@White, You used to write such good stuff under the nome de guerre Nottinghill. Now, it seems like all vitriol and unimaginative insult. Go back to contributing the good stuff!

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@USA, You should not be concerned. White can only stay mad at you for so long.

Will
Member
Will

@WB,that’s hilarious. I really doubt that USA is concerned and could cares less how long the moron stays mad. It’s obvious this boy White is mentally disturbed. We will get the boy removed from Ammoland post haste.

Will
Member
Will

@USA,I think Rev has OCD and is off his meds, or either just full blown insane. Let’s expand and build that additional room.

Oldmarine
Member
Oldmarine

Was that supposed to prove a point or just to make you feel better ?

Graystone
Member
Graystone

noneoftheabove. You are a disgrace!! The use of the utterancers that you pass off as a means of communication are completely abhorrent!!
Women & children read these comments, as well as men who know how to communicate without resorting to the foul utterances you belch. Have you NO respect?!!

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

Fact being asswipe is that the top knows what’s happening and are working on it. Other members like myself have caught on to what you fucks are doing.
Anyone would be hard pressed to list (10) names to any story more or less (15-30). There just are that many here everyday on each story and [email protected] knows it now. My intention was get to down vote my as many times as possible… it a trail dumbass!!!
Your days are numbered turd!

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

For All Those Concerned : I’ve demonstrated to Ammoland how the down and up voting is being done by creating multiple screen names using multiple email addys and signing in and out using the drop down list of display names.
Their BS will end soon. With it my vulgar responses to their antics. Apos to those who matter… bear with me.

Will
Member
Will

Listen to this sick SOB. Bear with my insanity and my vulgar outbursts ! He thinks Ammoland is going to save him from being voted down ? Ammoland came up with the voting system to start with ! This sick little pissant and his vulgar rants is exact why he will continue to get voted down,down,down ! Can’t make this stuff up !

Oldmarine
Member
Oldmarine

The SCOTUS has contradicted it’s selves and made Decisions sometimes that are are completely against the Constitution. That is because every time the leftist have the majority it fails miserably. The left wishes that there wasn’t a Constitution.

One Bad One is that Speech and action are the same.

Their authority is to only decide if a law agrees with the constitution, PERIOD. they are not authorized to give opinions because that has nothing to do with the Constitution. They abuse their authority many times just because of which party has control of the court.

Greg K
Member
Greg K
Greg K
Member
Greg K
tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

NEVER use the leftist wikipedia as a source.
Wikipedia is a leftist propaganda source. Use a Law Book, like Black’s Law Dictionary or many of the law journals.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Am not super hot on Wiki myself, but it has some good info links people can do their own research…only posted it because if you asked someone about incorporation of the BOR, they will give a blank stare. Even if they have a law degree. Very, very few know this history, and they should, cuz it’s very important to how we got into this mess that Dean is illuminating. BTW, Cornell aint bad either.

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

Yes, Cornell is fairly good but tends not to go into technical reasoning. A pity.
I see you were down voted, also. Yet, the craven cowards ran away crying and did not leave a reason for their dislike. .

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

How do you know what is a Con Law curriculum? How do you know it is very, very few? Have you talked to all of them? Take a logic course.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Yes I have, and in some Con Law courses, they don’t even read the Constitution Bill. That’s no bullshit!

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

You are supposed to read that on your own as you go through the cases, didn’t you know. What school did you take these Con Law classes at?

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Come on, admit it you did not know and you were lost in the class. Did you pass? Which school or did you make it up?

tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

I see the screaming yellow cowards hate law references and knowledge. Three down votes.
So, they are cowards and ignorant, too. Probably democrats.
It is to laugh.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Wear them like a badge of honor! If you put a burr under their saddle, maybe it needed to be put there. The scotus has a lot of the later decisions readily available, but older stuff can be hard to get to. I love reading the actual decisions. It’s good to know where the precedence is created. The Barron case is one of interest because it falls under bad precedence, nearest I can tell. Is it because it was argued poorly? Was it political? Don’t know, but it really stands out, because it would make no sense for the States… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Precedence? Do you mean precedents? precedence |ˈpresədəns, priˈsēdns| noun the condition of being considered more important than someone or something else; priority in importance, order, or rank: his desire for power soon took precedence over any other consideration. • the order to be ceremonially observed by people of different rank, according to an acknowledged or legally determined system: quarrels over precedence among the Bonaparte family marred the coronation. precedent noun |ˈpresid(ə)nt| an earlier event or action that is regarded as an example or guide to be considered in subsequent similar circumstances: there are substantial precedents for using interactive media in… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

And Barron was rendered moot by the 14th Amendment.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

citation?

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

The guy that does not know the difference between precedence and precedents is demanding a citation from me. Why don’t you take some Con Law classes.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Show your brilliance Bill.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

I caught you using the wrong word. That is pretty brilliant. Then I gave you definitions. That was pretty diplomatic.

StWayne
Member
StWayne

And here is my attempt at levity, bearing in mind that we seem to have two very learned lawyers of the Constitution going at it as if debating the merits of the Scopes Monkey Trial: “Your Honor — I object!”

Greg K
Member
Greg K

From Merriam Webster to you
Precedence
2a : the fact of coming or occurring earlier in time
Synonyms
priority, right-of-way
Put your citation out there for all to enjoy. Show me how the Constitution is a Trust.

Will
Member
Will

@Greg,I wouldn’t advise challenging Bill on constitutional issues. The man knows what he’s talking about. I’m not saying that you don’t too though.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

@Will, Thank you.

StWayne
Member
StWayne

Your Honor, I object!

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Will, and yet he won’t cite his cases. Watch out for empty BS…This case I cited is being argued this very day. In fact, it’s one of the things the States are hanging their hats on so far as Red Fags and Civil Forfeiture are concerned. I mean think about it. How is it that we have come to the point that States or Fed laws are given supremacy by the SCOTUS? I traced it back and Barron gets cited a lot. Seeing how we are talking guns, let me give you one where it was cited fairly recently. McDonald… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Barron was cited in McDonald because the 2A had not been incorporated against the states, yet. The S. Ct was telling everyone why McDonald posed in important civil Rights question, thus setting up the rest of the analysis leading to the privileges and immunities clause incorporating the 2A against the states.
Do you even understand this stuff when you read it?

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Yes I did understand it, that’s why I pointed out to Will that you could have bolstered your argument with it.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

I am not on your payroll. Look things up yourself.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Take a Con Law Class.

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Leave Merriam at home. Go get a Blacks. Merriam is general. Blacks is specific to the law and authoritative.
Using Merriam Webster is like using a how. Using Black’s is like using a back hoe.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

More corrosive empty bullshit Bill, do you have any substance? Like a citation proving your next point?

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

I am not going to teach you law, no matter how manipulative you try to be. It does no good to read cases by themselves. You have to be able to string these concepts and propositions together. Taking some law classes.
Go to Shepard’s Citator.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

More empty BS, you won’t because you can’t. You are a liar Bill. I’ve noticed how you talk in generalities and when someone thinks they may have a case, you poo poo it. If need be I will bring up the first one you were dead wrong about for all to witness…Want to know something real cool Bill. I made a call to someone who knows their stuff. Guess what people who read this, only PROGRESSIVES think the Constitution is a “Trust” (a living breathing document as they put it). The Constitution is a Compact comprised of many Contracts that… Read more »

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Liar is it? Are you familiar with the four common law torts? Better watch you allegations. We know that the framers had a trust model on their mind because many were lawyers talking in trust language. Trusts are not living breathing documents. Trust documents are very specific and the fiduciary is loath to do anything outside the four corners of the trust document. Contracts are flexible can be modified, by agreement between the parties, because the parties are still alive. Trusts can only be modified by court decree because the trust maker is generally dead. Trusts are not flexible. Shut… Read more »

Greg K
Member
Greg K

“Contracts are flexible can be modified, by agreement between the parties, because the parties are still alive.”
Ah-Ha! Your words not mine. What you just said is “Contracts are Amendable.”

“Trusts can only be modified by court decree because the trust maker is generally dead.”
By your own words you know it’s not a trust because the Constitution can not be “Modified by court decree, legally.” Right?

Wild Bill
Member
Wild Bill

Wrong. You totally misinterpret. The framers intended that our Constitution be difficult to modify. I got your number now. Some people can memorize cases, but can not string together the propositions that the cases stand for.
By the way, you have not answered any of my other questions, although I have been quite diplomatic with you.

Greg K
Member
Greg K

Used your own words…there’s no misinterpretation Bill. You’re are patently false again. Admit it and move on. Which question

StWayne
Member
StWayne

The jury is reminded that they can object for any reason, if only on the merits. Oh, oh. Here comes the Judge. I’m outta here!

StWayne
Member
StWayne

Your Honor, I object!

Oldvet
Member
Oldvet

@ETAL…I tire ,I’m outa here too.

Greg K
Member
Greg K
tetejaun
Member
tetejaun

I see the cowards down voted you three times yet NONE of the yellow cowards had anything to say.
Cowardice is rampant on this board.

Jonesy
Member
Jonesy

Communists Democrat Trolls..

noneoftheabove
Member
noneoftheabove

@tetejuan: There was A time they were forced to comment and divulge themselves. This new platform lets the coward hide behind a button and skirt. Language, typing patterns notwithstanding.
The schizoid’s has a marker and a tell.

Heed the Call-up
Member
Heed the Call-up

As several of the above posts show, using logic and reason to debate with certain posters is of little value – you just refuse reality. That then leaves the other two choices, just ignore your ignorant, irrational posts or down-vote them. In the past, without this “voting” system, we had the choice of ignoring the insanity or posting replies. However, looking at the baseness, vulgarity, and petulant responses to to replies to your insane and foolish posts, it leaves little reason to reply to most of your posts. The logical assumption is that your apparent immaturity and lack of rational… Read more »