MacDonald v Chicago - Open Thread

[jgalt]

As a side note, I think the circumstances that have led us to this point as a nation will eventually be our undoing, but that's another topic...

-Mark

And one best discussed over a beer or three, not is writing on a forum... While I'm more concise, and likely more clear in writing, it just takes too long to get everything down...

[mrokern]

As a side note, I think the circumstances that have led us to this point as a nation will eventually be our undoing, but that's another topic...

-Mark

And one best discussed over a beer or three, not is writing on a forum... While I'm more concise, and likely more clear in writing, it just takes too long to get everything down...

If we're having THAT chat, let me suggest a case.

[Pat Cannon]

As a side note, I think the circumstances that have led us to this point as a nation will eventually be our undoing, but that's another topic...

And one best discussed over a beer or three, not in writing on a forum... While I'm more concise, and likely more clear in writing, it just takes too long to get everything down...

If we're having THAT chat, let me suggest a case.

That's for sure. And I hereby officially invite myself!

[bstrawse]

As a side note, I think the circumstances that have led us to this point as a nation will eventually be our undoing, but that's another topic...

-Mark

And one best discussed over a beer or three, not is writing on a forum... While I'm more concise, and likely more clear in writing, it just takes too long to get everything down...

If we're having THAT chat, let me suggest a case.

I did just buy a case of the new Grain Belt Nordeast
B

[nyffman]

This is an interesting role-reversal for conservatives and liberals... lefties clamoring for states' rights and righties begging for an expanded federal reach. This is certainly the right result, it is just amazing what can happen when you add guns to the equation.

That's the part I'm having the biggest problem with this. Maybe by the end of the week, I'll have time to read the pdf that you linked. I'm glad they seem to afirm the RKBA, but I thought the constitution was written by the people/states to place limits on the Federal govt. which was their creation. OTOH, to extrapolate, if every state infringed the 2nd amendment, how do you exercise the right? Since it says "shall not be infringed" rather than "congress shall make no law", does that tell you anything?

[jgalt]

This is an interesting role-reversal for conservatives and liberals... lefties clamoring for states' rights and righties begging for an expanded federal reach. This is certainly the right result, it is just amazing what can happen when you add guns to the equation.

That's the part I'm having the biggest problem with this. Maybe by the end of the week, I'll have time to read the pdf that you linked. I'm glad they seem to afirm the RKBA, but I thought the constitution was written by the people/states to place limits on the Federal govt. which was their creation. OTOH, to extrapolate, if every state infringed the 2nd amendment, how do you exercise the right? Since it says "shall not be infringed" rather than "congress shall make no law", does that tell you anything?

The issue certainly has become confused, indeed reversed over time, but in 1789, the Constitution applied only to the federal government. For example, the 1st Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion...". Well, through the first few years of the 1800s, Massachusetts actually required every man to belong to a church, and pay taxes to it (though it didn't require anyone to belong to any particular denomination...). Connecticut had an official state religion as well (Baptists, I believe - can't find a clear reference though) until 1818.

The point is that nothing in the US Constitution was designed to, or understood at the time of ratification to affect how the states were run. They were sovereign entities who were banding together for mutual defense, and to establish formal relations amongst each other, nothing more.

[DeanC]

if every state infringed the 2nd amendment, how do you exercise the right?

Many states have within their own constitutions a recognition of that right. I think Jason said 9 of the original 13 colonies recognized that right before there was a Bill of Rights.

To put it differently, right now we are one heartbeat away from McDonald and Heller being overturned. If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does not apply to the states and is a collective and not individual right, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

[mrokern]

if every state infringed the 2nd amendment, how do you exercise the right?

Many states have within their own constitutions a recognition of that right. I think Jason said 9 of the original 13 colonies recognized that right before there was a Bill of Rights.

To put it differently, right now we are one heartbeat away from McDonald and Heller being overturned. If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does not apply to the states and is a collective and not individual right, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

Make sure I'm in a state that recognizes my rights.

[Mr. White]

To put it differently, right now we are one heartbeat away from McDonald and Heller being overturned. If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does not apply to the states and is a collective and not individual right, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

I'm not sure that you need to worry about this too much. Whatever you may think of SCOTUS judges, they are still deferential to stare decisis to a large extent. For the same reason that conservative courts in the past never overturned Roe or Miranda, this will probably stand for quite some time, especially considering that McDonald follows a settled framework on indoctrination. If McDonald were decided by some new method of legal analysis that wasn't already a settled framework, then you may be right.

Make sure I'm in a state that recognizes my rights.

Or you can do that just in case.

[hammAR]

The existing Government was just damn lucky that citizens didn't have guns in 1775..........

[DeanC]

if every state infringed the 2nd amendment, how do you exercise the right?

Many states have within their own constitutions a recognition of that right. I think Jason said 9 of the original 13 colonies recognized that right before there was a Bill of Rights.

To put it differently, right now we are one heartbeat away from McDonald and Heller being overturned. If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does not apply to the states and is a collective and not individual right, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

Make sure I'm in a state that recognizes my rights.

Duh - right answer, wrong proposition.

I meant to say: If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does apply to the states and yet is only a collective and not individual right and therefore overturns and usurps all state gun rights, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

[mrokern]

Duh - right answer, wrong proposition.

I meant to say: If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does apply to the states and yet is only a collective and not individual right and therefore overturns and usurps all state gun rights, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

Honestly, I think you'd see a flareup that makes the argument between Arizona and the feds over the immigration issue look like a footnote. I truly believe there would be showdowns between a number of states and the federal government, forcing Congress to legislatively cut the legs out from under SCOTUS.

[DeanC]

Duh - right answer, wrong proposition.

I meant to say: If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does apply to the states and yet is only a collective and not individual right and therefore overturns and usurps all state gun rights, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

Honestly, I think you'd see a flareup that makes the argument between Arizona and the feds over the immigration issue look like a footnote. I truly believe there would be showdowns between a number of states and the federal government, forcing Congress to legislatively cut the legs out from under SCOTUS.

Let us hope so.

[mrokern]

Duh - right answer, wrong proposition.

I meant to say: If 5 out of 4 lifetime appointed jurists decide that the 2A does apply to the states and yet is only a collective and not individual right and therefore overturns and usurps all state gun rights, what are you gonna do? Where are you gonna go?

Honestly, I think you'd see a flareup that makes the argument between Arizona and the feds over the immigration issue look like a footnote. I truly believe there would be showdowns between a number of states and the federal government, forcing Congress to legislatively cut the legs out from under SCOTUS.

Let us hope so.

Agreed. The alternative isn't too great.

[DeanC]

Agreed. The alternative isn't too great.

Yes - and you want to talk about shredding the Constitution? I am pretty convinced that was where it started.

I was watching the History Detectives the other night and I learned about these guys: Copperheads. I think I am a fan. (And I think the racist brush they were tarred with was unfair)