The privelege to "Interpret"

imported post

This burns me every time I hear, read or see it. "The constitution is a living document that blah blah blah blah blah.:cuss:

I understand that times have changed since the Constitution was adopted but howmany different and conflictinginterpretations will further impede US Citizens from enjoying a peaceful life in their own country. That is, the country that was intended by our forefathers. After witnessing a monarchy's tendency towards a lopsided social stratification and oppressive rule over the majority of a poverty stricken population, I believe the ideology was against the few ruling all.

I used to take my family to church a lot and I always struggled to find one where the pastor's interpretations were down to earth enough to grasp and implement in life. That is a thing of the past because the more educated I become the harder it is to sit in a church. I just don't go anymore.

We won't be moving out of the country though and this Bill of Rights is ours. This is our Constitution and so are the interpretations as long as the legislation that are put intolaws and thepenalties of said laws govern our communities.

I found a bit of literature that speaks to how I feel. It made me want toflya pair of American Flags from the back of a truck and circle that Big Wh1te colored Hou$e with this authorblastin' some really loud national anthem. The whole article is great...I think.






[align=center]Interpreting the Constitution and the Second Amendment [/align]http://www.2ampd.net/Articles/Riley/interpreting_the_constitution.htm





[align=center]By [/align]





[align=center]Stephen L. Riley [/align]
I have noticed that the claim that the Constitution needs to be interpreted virtually without exception comes from the liberal faction of our nation. These are the same people that spout the notion that the Constitution is a "living, breathing document that needs to grow and change with the times." I believe that the Founding Fathers upon hearing such an outlandish idea would be torn between laughter and admonishing the person making such a statement in an attempt to subvert what they had worked and fought so hard to give us. The Constitution is not a living breathing document, there is no such thing. It is a well thought out and debated set of guidelines and method of forming, operating and maintaining a government unlike the world had previously seen.

...A nation, like a ship needs a steady and unwavering method of steering and maintaining course and if that is lost or weakened, eventually both will flounder and be lost.:celebrate( hes right u no)

...Ten Commandments have never needed any change or amendment and it is their unwavering consistency that gives them the importance that they have...

...the ones trying to rewrite out history would have you believe that these men were largely poorly educated farmers and ranchers or merchants with little success in business. Few things could be further from the truth. All were well educated...fifty-six men that debated and passed the Declaration of Independence, twenty-four were lawyers and/or jurists (judges), nine were farmers with large plantations. Others were printers, authors, and owners of retail businesses, manufacturing companies and shipping companies... They were intelligent, educated and exacting in creating what they knew was the most important document of our government.

...words cannot be viewed in today's vernacular but...

...If the other writings of the Founding Fathers are consistent with what they carefully worded in the Constitution, then any "interpretation" that does not agree with that train of thought is without question wrong, and totally void of any credibility.

"The said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." - Sam Adams, as reported in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1879.

"The great object is that every man be armed. Everybody who is able may have a gun." - Patrick Henry

"Americans need never fear their government because of the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation." - James Madison
:quirky
"When firearms go, all goes....we need them every hour." - George Washington

"I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." - George Mason
:what:
"Laws that forbid the carrying of guns...disarm only those who are neither inclined not determined to commit crimes....Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailant; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." - Thomas Jefferson

"Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence...From the hour the Pilgrims landed, to the present day, events, occurrences, and tendencies prove that to ensure peace, security, and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference, they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." - George Washington

"The true importance of the Second Amendment will not be fully understood, until they begin to usurp its power." - Thomas Jefferson

"But there are some persons who would...persuade the people never to make use of their constitutional rights." - Samuel Adams

From an earlier historic perspective we find; "Both Oligarch and Tyrant mistrust the people, and therefore deprive them of arms." - Aristotle

Is it just me or do you choke on some of these interpretations?:X

Long Arm or Pistol? (just glad my trench coat is coming back out)

Keep and Bear arms? (don't piss off the state!):banghead:

And hey I thought that State Law did not super cede Federal Law. I'm going to read my law book now about that Incorporation Doctrine now. -Peace be with you and be with your Piece
:monkey

imported post

I think of the constitution as being a living document, that's why we have amendments. There's just a procedure that has to be followed in order for it to be 'living'.

imported post

I consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as being the foundation of our society. That foundation must be strong and solid, or else society may fall to ruin.

Regardless of technological advances that have come along since its ratification, dispite whatever fads and fashion of lifestyles have evolved, the original intent of the Constitution, original 10 articles and subsequent amendmentsof the BoR, are as applicable today asit was upon ratification.

The ratification process for amending the Constitution was made difficult for a reason. Had it not, the foundation that this nation was built on would have been undermined long ago, and our societymight lay in anarchaic ruin today.

imported post

Task Force 16 wrote:

I consider the Constitution and Bill of Rights as being the foundation of our society. That foundation must be strong and solid, or else society may fall to ruin.

Regardless of technological advances that have come along since its ratification, dispite whatever fads and fashion of lifestyles have evolved, the original intent of the Constitution, original 10 articles and subsequent amendmentsof the BoR, are as applicable today asit was upon ratification.

The ratification process for amending the Constitution was made difficult for a reason. Had it not, the foundation that this nation was built on would have been undermined long ago, and our societymight lay in anarchaic ruin today.

Click to expand...

You mean laws and rights aren't supposed to be a flavor of the month deal???? Keep in mind our elected officials have been known to do things such as renaming french fries to freedom fries (http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/03/11/sprj.irq.fries/) Which sends the wrong message because it takes time away that could be used for making productive laws or even more seriously their mistress. Think I even heard something about there being a debate over changing it back, to tired to google, almost 4 am time for bed.

But to the serious part.
The Bill of Rights is becoming useless because not many people seem to want the rights or are willing to use them. I'm sure many people here have been asked "why do you want a gun? THEY KILL PEOPLE!", at least once in their life. Usually, I point out how the statement THEY KILL PEOPLE is false, (at least until I make my very own Terminator which has AI) that guns are capable of killing people if thats what you want them to do and Yes that is why I keep a loaded gun because of self-defense. I don't wake up in the morning and thing, I want to kill someone with this gun. But I know if i need to it is there oh yeah, I forgot to mention IT IS MY RIGHT!!!

imported post

A hard and fast Originalist here - little wiggle room.

Study the past and the intent - all amendments to our Bill of Rights need to fit in function and form, and should be used judiciously to clarify where such is needed.

Living, breathing I can accept, but standing proudly with feet firmly planted where the Founding Fathers set them.

Yata hey

imported post

Notso wrote:

I think of the constitution as being a living document, that's why we have amendments. There's just a procedure that has to be followed in order for it to be 'living'.

Click to expand...

If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.— George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

Our founding fathers were wise men. What the politicians these days mean by a "living document" is exactly what President Washington warned us against.

imported post

JT wrote:

Notso wrote:

I think of the constitution as being a living document, that's why we have amendments. There's just a procedure that has to be followed in order for it to be 'living'.

Click to expand...

If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.— George Washington, Farewell Address, 1796

Our founding fathers were wise men. What the politicians these days mean by a "living document" is exactly what President Washington warned us against.

Click to expand...

THIS is what I meant, I guess I couldn't find the words. One Great quote that is actually in with the article is..."The true importance of the Second Amendment will not be fully understood, until they begin to usurp its power." - Thomas Jefferson... Nothing could better state the situation so many of us face. Asourrights areslowly degradedby interpretation or state implemented laws that hampertheir actual applicability,it isthe "living, breathing"concept that weuse to describe our Constitution and it's partsthatis actually what taking the life from the document's. I know there wasthe original provision, but I think that like all things authoritative, we've set off an a tangent of abuse.

Politicians today are a far cry from the great men that forged this nation. Are they the men thatthe framers were? I think not sir.Our forefathers grew up learning how to build, make a home, sail a ship, commune and be accountable to a community andPARTICIPATE in local government issues. Taking lessons from each aspect. Just think, it wont be long before the "video game/laptop generation" is in place governing they're kids. Imagine how the lack of work ethic, the lack of life lessons and the fragmentation of society is going to affect them and their decisions. Will they be suitable to amend these documents?

I watched a kids movie with my daughter the other day called Wall-e or something and all of the people- in the future- had left earth and all was done for them. They rode around in chairs and drank hot dogs. It was pretty clever because they showed a loss of bone mass and a growth in people ass. Now use that same metaphor on politicians brains. As we coddle our children and make damn sure they don't face the hardships we did as children we are taking away the elements that made us who we are. :banghead:

I posted this article because of the long arm issue. I'm for bearing arms- all types and sizes, however.:celebrate

But we are interpreting the second amendment as the right to go to k-mart with our gun. I think that's a good idea because the BG's are everywhere these days. But I don't think that this is what was in mind when the words were penned. I think that these wise men did not want us to fear gov't simply because they had the only boom sticks. They must of wanted us to have them and allow us to take them anywhere our lively-hoodswere threatened on a large scale.

They also, I believe, had a different idea of the term "militia". In today's vernacular, most people think of militias as the guys they see on the history channel dressed only in camo, wearing a hunter orange ski-mask with a smoke hangin' from their lip, shootin' at a target and rolling on the ground between shots. They think that the militia is quietly gearing up for war and is only a bad thing. A militia, in my mind, is the group of men and women that could come together if government factions tried to run over the people. A group of free-thinking individuals who meet to discuss what their government is doing and how it affects them, among other things.:shock:

That is the really great thing about this forum. We are still fragmented as a society but we think for ourselves while sharing opinions, venting (in moderation), andprobably the best element of opencarry.org,here is a place where men sharpen men.

Peace b w/ u & b w/ ur Piece:monkey

imported post

I just finished reading a novel that would be good for everyone to read. I gives a wonderful insight to the importance of maintaining the original intent of the Constitution.

The book is "The Freedom Factor" by Gerald Lund.

imported post

Let us remember that the Constitution is not a document granting rights, unalienable. The Constitution is a document designed to Restrain Government. American Government functions never need changing- as originally- our American Government was extremely simple and super tiny. So small as to not share common place with growing trends, technology, or the latest anything. Thus not requiring great change. Humans have had and will always have the same basic needs- No more- No less. (Food, Shelter, Security, etc) The Constitution tried to ensure that the Government only guided and never imposed. The Amendment process was never supposed to provide an avenue in which alcohol could be banned outright- a prime example of mistake. Oh well- we All make mistakes.

imported post

The Constitution does not, nor does the government, grant us our rights. The bill of rights protects us from the government attempting to determine what rights we have. And what we've granted the government to do.
I believe as did our founders that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were tied together. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that ALL men are created equal and endowed by their CREATOR with with certain inalienable rights"
I'm not going to get into a religious debate, I care less what your religious beliefs are, but I'll defend to the death your right to believe them.
The Constitution and the first ten amendments are set in stone. The reason for amendments and the difficulty in ratification of any new amendments is clear. The founders wanted us to ensure we make no mistakes, and if we do they have to be amended also, hence the Prohibition and the amendment to repeal it.
As far as I'm concerned, we have allowed our government to backdoor far too many rules and regulations. "Regulatory rules and regulations, statutes etc" What we need to do is hit the reset button on the Constitution and make this a Constitutional government again.
Far too much BS goin on in the Legislature and the White House with the 51 vote "reconciliation"

imported post

I think it's Executive Orders that have done the most damage to our country. Executive Orders bypass a system of checks and balances before becoming law.

imported post

Those who argue against "interpretation" of the Constitution had better be happy with a Second Amendment that is not incorporated against the States.

That is the way it has been for over 100 years: it is only through re-interpretation that we will have a Second Amendment that we can apply against State governments, who these days are the greatest "usurpers" of the PRTKBA.

And for all the 10thers who speak piously about the "founding fathers" designs for limited government: Madison and Jefferson argued pretty much the same thing about interpretation of the "General Welfare" Clause in Article I Section 8, but lost that debate to Washington and Hamilton who wanted a more robust federal government.

If you want to re-fight that battle, you want a judiciary who is willing to "re-interpret" the 10th Amendment in a new way: you hope that the Constitution has at least enough "life" toconvince a panel of federal judges that a more libertarian philosophy was"meant."

imported post

cscitney87 wrote:

I think it's Executive Orders that have done the most damage to our country. Executive Orders bypass a system of checks and balances before becoming law.

Click to expand...

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+

imported post

The Donkey wrote:

That is the way it has been for over 100 years: it is only through re-interpretation that we will have a Second Amendment that we can apply against State governments, who these days are the greatest "usurpers" of the PRTKBA.

Click to expand...

Try actually reading the language of the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights. It becomes very clear that the Second Amendment applied to the states from the very beginning.

As you read, you will find very specific language throughout indicating that specific provision apply to specific entities. For example, in the First Amendment, it specifically states "Congress shall pass no law...", however, the Second Amendment has no such qualification, indicating that there is no limit on where or to whom it applies.

imported post

rpyne wrote:

The Donkey wrote:

That is the way it has been for over 100 years: it is only through re-interpretation that we will have a Second Amendment that we can apply against State governments, who these days are the greatest "usurpers" of the PRTKBA.

Click to expand...

Try actually reading the language of the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights. It becomes very clear that the Second Amendment applied to the states from the very beginning.

As you read, you will find very specific language throughout indicating that specific provision apply to specific entities. For example, in the First Amendment, it specifically states "Congress shall pass no law...", however, the Second Amendment has no such qualification, indicating that there is no limit on where or to whom it applies.

Click to expand...

A counter example would be the first clause of the Seventh Amendment, which reads:

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, . . . ."

There is nothing there that limits this provision to the United States, and yetthis provision is not self-incorporated against the States, nor incorporated by the 14th Amendment.

imported post

I'm just having a problem understanding why it is so hard to comprehend the meaning of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" I just don't think that needs ANY interpretation?? Maybe it's just me Donkey, but that just seems pretty plain english. Course me bein' a redneck hillbilly Christian right-wing tea-bagger conservative, it might be plainer to me if they'd written,,,Y'all carry any gun ya want, any way ya want, anywhere ya want, any time ya want. But hey I don't claim to be a freakin genius, I leave that up to liberals like you.
Keep your powder dry!

imported post

Notso wrote:

I think of the constitution as being a living document, that's why we have amendments. There's just a procedure that has to be followed in order for it to be 'living'.

Click to expand...

Amen!

imported post

KansasMustang wrote:

I'm just having a problem understanding why it is so hard to comprehend the meaning of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" I just don't think that needs ANY interpretation?? Maybe it's just me Donkey, but that just seems pretty plain english. Course me bein' a redneck hillbilly Christian right-wing tea-bagger conservative, it might be plainer to me if they'd written,,,Y'all carry any gun ya want, any way ya want, anywhere ya want, any time ya want. But hey I don't claim to be a freakin genius, I leave that up to liberals like you.
Keep your powder dry!

Click to expand...

Yep: makes me want to sing "You Light Up My Life" . . . .

imported post

The Donkey wrote:

KansasMustang wrote:

I'm just having a problem understanding why it is so hard to comprehend the meaning of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" I just don't think that needs ANY interpretation?? Maybe it's just me Donkey, but that just seems pretty plain english. Course me bein' a redneck hillbilly Christian right-wing tea-bagger conservative, it might be plainer to me if they'd written,,,Y'all carry any gun ya want, any way ya want, anywhere ya want, any time ya want. But hey I don't claim to be a freakin genius, I leave that up to liberals like you.
Keep your powder dry!

Click to expand...

Yep: makes me want to sing "You Light Up My Life" . . . .

Click to expand...

From which end?

Yata hey

imported post

cscitney87 wrote:

I think it's Executive Orders that have done the most damage to our country. Executive Orders bypass a system of checks and balances before becoming law.

Click to expand...

AMEN TO THAT BROTHER!