XPost: alt.politics.congress, alt.politics.corruption, alt.politics.economics   
   XPost: alt.politics.election, alt.politics.misc, alt.politics.obama   
   XPost: alt.politics.scorched-earth, alt.politics.socialism.mao,    
   lt.politics.trump   
   XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.conspiracy, alt.apocolypse   
   XPost: alt.politics.usa, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.infowars   
   XPost: alt.beam-me-up.scotty.there-is-no.intelligent-life.down-here,   
   alt.politics.guns, alt.society.liberalism   
   XPost: alt.politics.democrats.d   
   From: NOT-SURE@idiocracy.gov   
      
   On 6/3/22 4:57 PM, David Hartung wrote:   
   > On 6/3/22 15:39, Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >> On 6/3/2022 1:28 PM, David Hartung wrote:   
   >>> On 6/3/22 14:41, Rudy Canoza wrote:   
   >>>> In the consensus legal view of the right to keep and bear arms, the   
   >>>> right does *not* mean you can have just whatever guns and arms you   
   >>>> wish.  It never meant that.  Thus, some guns and other arms you may   
   >>>> wish to have can be prohibited to you, and it is not an infringement   
   >>>> of the right.  In prohibiting some arms, the government is not   
   >>>> "limiting" the right.  The right itself *already* has inherent   
   >>>> limits that *mean* you may not have just whatever arms you wish to   
   >>>> have.   
   >>>   
   >>> You have stated many times that the Constitution (and by extension   
   >>> the government) don't grant rights, but the way that you keep harping   
   >>> on limitations to rights,[Hartung comma] says just the opposite.   
   >>   
   >> The Hartung comma is *wrong*.   
   > If you say so.   
   >   
   >> Your statement is also wrong.  I have instructed you on this countless   
   >> times. The right is whatever it is, regardless of any mention of it in   
   >> the Constitution.  The second amendment takes the right as *given*,   
   >> but given elsewhere.  The amendment also doesn't address any inherent   
   >> limits to the right, because it doesn't need to address them.   
   >>   
   >> The government *also* doesn't address the limits of the rights, except   
   >> when it argues in court.  When DC enacted the law that was a /de   
   >> facto/ ban on handguns, it did so in the belief that the ban was   
   >> *within* the limits of the right.  The DC government was *not*   
   >> attempting to "limit the right."  It turns out they were wrong, and   
   >> handguns are *within* the limits of the right, and cannot be banned.   
   >>   
   >> To date, *every* ban on assault weapons that has been challenged in   
   >> federal court has been upheld (although no appeals have ever reached   
   >> the Supreme Court).  What that means is that all those appellate   
   >> judges who have upheld assault weapon bans have found that those   
   >> weapons are *outside* the inherent limits of the right.  And they are.   
   >   
   > Once again. If the government can limit any right, that right becomes a   
   > privilege granted by the government. Current jurisprudence says that the   
   > government may limit the right to keep and bear arms, which means that   
   > the government sees the bearing of arms as a privilege, not a right.   
   > That is why liberty loving citizens are so concerned.   
      
   And an even larger problem for the Democrats is that the U.S. GOVERNMENT   
   never "created" the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms. And if   
   they didn't create the unalienable RIGHT or a civil liberty   
   (civil_right)... under which delegated power to the United States are   
   they passing their REGULATIONS?   
      
   The Constitution's 2nd Amendment simply states that it exists, and does   
   not create that RIGHT and is NOT delegating any power to limit THE RIGHT   
   OF THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms.   
      
   The Democrats need to explain where the United States is delegated the   
   power to regulate, or for that matter why the States feel they can   
   regulate that RIGHT of the people, since the 2nd Amendment also clearly   
   tells us that it's the RIGHT of the people and in Amendment 10...   
      
   Amendment X   
   *The powers not delegated to the United States* by the 		Constitution,   
   nor *prohibited by it to the States*, *are reserved* 	*to* the States   
   respectively, or to *the people* .   
      
      
   ...Since *THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE* is clearly enumerated by the   
   Constitution that it is a RIGHT of the people then it's denying that   
   power to regulate that RIGHT to the States.  It can't be a RIGHT of the   
   people if it's a POWER that is REGULATED by the STATES. We know this   
   because Amendment 10 says "or to the people" not "and" to the people.   
      
      
   Which means the Democrats are so far out of reality that it's barely   
   worth discussing as being within Joe Biden's sole power as the executive   
   to make any laws what so ever limiting any of our RIGHTS.  And Congress   
   can't VIOLATE the Constitution and there is NO power delegated to the   
   U.S. Congress to regulate the RIGHT of the people, just like the   
   Amendment they were required to get for PROHIBITION because there was no   
   power delegated to ban alcohol consumption.   
      
   All they need is 3/4 of the states to to ratify an Amendment.... until   
   the Democrats can almost do that, it's all just political posturing and   
   lies to try to use fear to get votes.   
      
      
   --   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   .   
   -That's Karma-   
      
   *IF YOU'RE READING THIS YOU ARE A SURVIVOR*   
   *The first rule of SURVIVAL CLUB* is we talk about it, we hate   
   censorship. Never trust what Democrats or Marxists tell you. Make them   
   prove it with actual verifiable facts and science. And if you didn't   
   find the duplicitous lies in what the Marxist-Democrats told you then   
   you didn't dig deep enough. The *Gruber* *Doctrine* is the   
   Marxist-Democrat plan that says it's "to the Democrats advantage to have   
   a lack of transparency and then lie about everything".   
   https://rumble.com/vkt8ld-call-it-the-stupidity-of-the-american-   
   oter-or-whatever.-how-libs-exploit-t.html   
      
   *The next rule of SURVIVAL CLUB* is   
   160 - Why is it called Gun Control and abortion RIGHTS, when in reality   
   it's GUN RIGHTS and abortion control.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)