tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post3329610146120777081..comments2024-01-03T05:18:54.650-05:00Comments on CDR Salamander: The Consitutional canary lives ...CDR Salamanderhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05981221786954902349noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-48306387645283152002010-06-30T10:42:57.000-04:002010-06-30T10:42:57.000-04:00J.J. I recommend you read who George Mason was......J.J. I recommend you read who George Mason was... he is the REASON we have a Bill of Rights.MR T's Haircutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-41350440082524583762010-06-29T22:21:09.000-04:002010-06-29T22:21:09.000-04:00Oh, good grief. I'll even get the exact quote...Oh, good grief. I'll even get the exact quote for you.<br /><br /><i>"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, <b>Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...</b>" </i>(emphasis mine).<br /><br />http://www.democracyweb.org/consent/principles.php<br />http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htmGrumpy Old Hamnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-42403246372808211882010-06-29T14:14:31.000-04:002010-06-29T14:14:31.000-04:00More than a little off-topic, but I've been to...More than a little off-topic, but I've been to Poland 4 times in the last 7 years and I just found out about the visa thing 2 weeks ago. That visa requirement is about the stupidest thing I have heard in a long time...<br /><br />I may be heading back to the Gdansk area next summer (depends on other plans at this point)....Poland falls in the top three of countries I've visited (out of...err...26 if I count right).Aubreynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-30229837079046556752010-06-29T13:54:24.000-04:002010-06-29T13:54:24.000-04:00MTH, I'd love to... Guess what? the only Schen...MTH, I'd love to... Guess what? the only Schengen zone country that doesnt get visa-free access to USA is Greece? no, Portugal? No! Poland? Yes!<br />I'd love to dive at Florida Keys, climb the Blue Ridge, look from the top of Empire Stat Bldng., watch the Grand Canyon, and of course shoot some good guns :P<br />Offtopic: Good news this day from AFG, Polish/ANA joint task force killed atleast 24 Talib fighters in a big skirmish. ewok40knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-66064947487762914072010-06-29T12:04:00.000-04:002010-06-29T12:04:00.000-04:00Colorado has the same gig as Vermont - got to show...Colorado has the same gig as Vermont - got to show evidence of completing a class, then as long as your record is clean you're getting the CCW. State court even over-ruled the college campuses here (and it doesn't get much more nutty liberal than CU Boulder) and said they can't ban weapons for CCW holders.<br /><br />Oh, and for the record its a .40 S&W - fun gun, and reliable as all get out...backed up with the P90 at home :)Aubreynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-72270879464446540972010-06-29T11:51:16.000-04:002010-06-29T11:51:16.000-04:00Gosh, didn't know Bill Clinton started a law s...Gosh, didn't know Bill Clinton started a law school...Hey, J.J., the people have ALWAYS been individuals! If they wanted to be part of a "collective", they should have been born RUSSIAN.Byronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-43792782158173672010-06-29T11:47:02.000-04:002010-06-29T11:47:02.000-04:00Limiting the power of the Federal Government vis a...Limiting the power of the Federal Government vis a vis the States is not about individual rights, it is about raising the power of another governmental form- the States over the individual. Anyone living in a local area like say NYC knows that local and State regulation and infringements on rights can be far more onerous than Federal infringement....J.J.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-82378741893406736442010-06-29T11:43:24.000-04:002010-06-29T11:43:24.000-04:00No actually the collective "the people" ...No actually the collective "the people" is somewhat vague but certainly the Constitution does protect collective rights. You must not confuse the collective rights of the "people" with the State or Federal Governments which are referred to specifically in opposition to "the people". One can imagine that the notion of majority or representative rule is to protect "the people" from onerous government by royalty, or whoever had the engines of power. Democracy, representative democracy, indeed the ratification of the Constitution itself were collective acts provided for and protected by the constitution.J.J.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-89038403388710956812010-06-29T11:13:42.000-04:002010-06-29T11:13:42.000-04:00Huh?
Ever heard of the Bill of Rights?
Actually ...Huh?<br /><br />Ever heard of the Bill of Rights?<br /><br />Actually the Constitution was all about INDIVIDUAL rights. It incorporated the various States viewpoints and it spelled out the LIMITED power of the Federal govt. Somehow people try to casually dismiss it as living, or breathing or vague... GET WITH PROGRAM IDIOTS! THE CONSTITUTION... IT IS THAT SIMPLE!!MR T's Haircutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-79404125739751587092010-06-29T10:15:23.000-04:002010-06-29T10:15:23.000-04:00Oh, I am on travel today in my POV for about 6 hou...Oh, I am on travel today in my POV for about 6 hours. Mr. Ruger's SP101 always gets the jump seat. His LCP fits well as I move about outside the car as well.CDR Salamandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-64875976360114570022010-06-29T09:51:18.000-04:002010-06-29T09:51:18.000-04:00JJ,
You missed the boat. Go back and start again...JJ,<br /><br />You missed the boat. Go back and start again. This time review the documents Phib points you to. Your logic chain takes you to an argument that the Constitution protects collective rights. So you would have to define that for us.UltimaRatioRegisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-38548686621977306512010-06-29T09:22:10.000-04:002010-06-29T09:22:10.000-04:00Don't forget the Magna Carta, either, bud. Add...Don't forget the Magna Carta, either, bud. Add in a few history books so you can understand the context behind the Constitution (the ones that weren't revised to reflect revisionist views, either).Byronnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-23399767110897426412010-06-29T09:20:57.000-04:002010-06-29T09:20:57.000-04:00I'm thinking about it, except that I must disa...I'm thinking about it, except that I must disagree insofar as I can only find one instance in the Constitution where "people" is referring to the individual, it is almost always used as a collective. Thus the 2d Amendment could bear the interpretation that the people as a collective through their local militias could not have the right to bear arms infringed upon. Of course the parallel language "the right of the people to be secure in their persons..." seems to be very individually directed.J.J.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-63427104872187099672010-06-29T09:05:57.000-04:002010-06-29T09:05:57.000-04:00Wow. So much to disagree with. Yes, the Constitu...Wow. So much to disagree with. Yes, the Constitution was defining our system of Government. And the Bill of Rights limited the power of the Federal government. But all was done against the background of individual liberties. All of it. <br /><br />"<i>or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."</i><br /><br />"<i>the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"</i><br /><br />"<i>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects"</i><br /><br />"<i>No person shall be held to answer for any capital, or otherwise infamous crime"</i><br /><br />"<i>In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State"</i><br /><br />"<i>The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."</i><br /><br />"<i>are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."</i><br /><br />Sounds like a great deal of reference to individual liberties to me. As "the people" is universally considered to be reference to the individual and not the collective. Unless you're Chuck Schumer and want to repeal the 2nd Amendment.UltimaRatioRegisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-25098424040949480972010-06-29T08:57:02.000-04:002010-06-29T08:57:02.000-04:00You need to step back from nuance and start from &...You need to step back from nuance and start from "Go." Back to primary sources.<br /><br />Read Locke. Then the Declaration of Ind. Then the Constitution. Then the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.<br /><br />Your opion may change.CDR Salamandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-22772210734560235642010-06-29T08:47:43.000-04:002010-06-29T08:47:43.000-04:00I'm not sure the Constitution per se is a prot...I'm not sure the Constitution <i>per se</i> is a protector of individual liberty. As originally written it was almost certainly not-- it was a "Constitution" namely the constituting of the institutions of government-- the legislative, executive and judicial etc. The first ten amendments which seem to protect individual liberties were eventually interpreted by the Court to be only limitations on the power of the Federal Goverment, so the individual was left to the devices of the states, which makes sense given that the Constitution did protect the instiutition of slave holding. So after a devastating civil war, i.e. after the Constitution proved a failure as written, it gets amended in such a vague way that in order to protect individuals from State governments, the Courts come up with incorporation through the 14th Amendment. It is not the Constitution by itself but the Constitution has it happens to have been interpreted by certain jurists that has become the protector of individual liberty. Sometimes I think it is the tradition of wrongly believing the Constitution was about protecting individual liberty that has protected our individual liberties.J.J.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-31136303473510568342010-06-29T07:57:56.000-04:002010-06-29T07:57:56.000-04:00Kagan is an activist who is no friend of the Const...Kagan is an activist who is no friend of the ConstitutionMR T's Haircutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-34593391686448689782010-06-29T07:55:09.000-04:002010-06-29T07:55:09.000-04:00lol Ewok,
you should come to America and live for...lol Ewok,<br /><br />you should come to America and live for a month. MR T's Haircutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-35213630240841228632010-06-29T07:28:16.000-04:002010-06-29T07:28:16.000-04:00I have a HK USP45F on my duty belt, and a Colt AR-...I have a HK USP45F on my duty belt, and a Colt AR-15 and a Winchester 1300 in the squad. I am comfortable with what I have. SCOTTtheBADGERnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-70376494095017105562010-06-29T05:33:24.000-04:002010-06-29T05:33:24.000-04:00Jeff: Kagan will be replacing Stevens, who althoug...Jeff: Kagan will be replacing Stevens, who although appointed by a Republican has a judicial philosophy that can be summarized as 'If I like it it's constitutional, if I don't it isn't." Kagan may turn out to be a better judge. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-60823263591642052922010-06-29T04:29:52.000-04:002010-06-29T04:29:52.000-04:00Well, on the other end of the scale: Japan - top o...Well, on the other end of the scale: Japan - top of gun control and politeness scale. I am more and more convinced that criminal-problem scociety without guns is as dangerous as with guns (think machetes/gaspipes/whatever), while high law-abiding standard society even with guns remains safe.<br />Been doing local research for here in Poland. 40 millions people.<br />Law guns are here pretty strict, not much reduced from the communist times.<br />About 700 homicides yearly, of which about 400 are commited in domestic, usually alcohol-driven incidents, most often with kitchen knives or other "dangerous tool". Less than 40 gun use case. I have seriously more probability of being killed by atmospheric discharge (aka thunderbolt) than getting shot. And even more probability of being ran over by car than getting murdered, but I guess in the US the case is the same.<br />Can anyone provide me with statistics for some comparable size state in the US?<br />Anyway one big problem I see is that when in XVIIIth century Constitution was amended for the 2nd time, armed to the teeth homicidal maniac walking into crowded area could kill 2 persons with handgun in each hand, then be restrained by citizens on scene (and quite possibly executed on the spot, but thats another matter). By the advent of six-shooters, problem got worse, but still was manageable. Widespread use of automatic weapons was what makes problem grave. Even police with standard handgun plus shotgun in the patrol car loadout finds itself increasingly outgunned. Think Beverly Hills Cop (the first) finale, or the infamous case of "Terminator robbers"<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout<br />. That in turn has led to ever greater spread of SWAT units and military-grade weapons in police work.ewok40knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-10418237535668449792010-06-29T03:48:24.000-04:002010-06-29T03:48:24.000-04:00The "good" news is that Kagan, if she...The "good" news is that Kagan, if she's confirmed, will replace Ginsburg thus maintaining the balance. The Supreme Court has achieved a kind of dynamic stability where elder justices choose to retire during the administrations of ideological compatriots.<br /><br />If a conservative justice dies or is forced to retire in the next two years things could get...interesting.Jeff Gauchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-24706980137187963992010-06-29T01:02:15.000-04:002010-06-29T01:02:15.000-04:00It was Heinlein not Wells. It was Heinlein not Wells. Lobotomizednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-3409737132584985042010-06-29T00:14:57.000-04:002010-06-29T00:14:57.000-04:00Hey Progressives... The Constitution... READ IT.. ...Hey Progressives... The Constitution... READ IT.. MR T's Haircutnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7704146.post-61452163040045223322010-06-28T23:32:21.000-04:002010-06-28T23:32:21.000-04:00That is the BEST thing about my FL CCW! How cool ...That is the BEST thing about my FL CCW! How cool is it that Charles Bronson signs it?!LT Bnoreply@blogger.com