Appealing to authority regarding our supreme law of the land is no better than appealing to ignorance since they are both, usually considered fallacies.
..and you are no authority on this matter. Special Pleading of Fallacy. Ignorance is no excuse. You are no expert, you're just rambling on about something you have no awareness of or how it really pertains. Dude, just give it up. IF we don't respond to any more of your posts, it does not indicate you have a victory of any kind. We are just tired of your ridiculous suppositions that are unfounded and tested to be unsound.
The Dred Scott decision is also, more relevant court precedence arrived at via due process regarding controversial forms of private property.
So, why should any rational, civil Person in our republic believe the Second Amendment creates or establishes any rights in private property in the Case of the Militia of the United States?
How did they reach that conclusion, some of the electorate of the United States would like to be more well informed. Our federal Congress is clearly enumerated the power to provide for arming the militia of the United States. Rights in private property are secured in State Constitutions with the specific terms, "acquire" and "possess" and are available via due process and federal precedent already established regarding rights in even controversial forms of private property. And, those specific terms are nowhere to be found in our Second Amendment.
The terms, "acquire" and "possess" are nowhere to be found in our Second Amendment. It is why I have developed this line of reasoning and argument.
Keep and bear is not the same as acquire and possess; besides, only our federal Congress is delegated the social Power to write words on blank pieces of paper and have them enacted as laws in our republic.
see, this where you are wrong. The Bill of Rights are not written laws. Those are Rights, a list, to which, "Congress shall pass no laws abridging these Rights." Where are you digging your conspiracies theories up? Rights are not Laws...............
yes, keep and bear, (acquire and possess) is the supreme law of the land secured in the second amendment. I'm glad you agree
Only our federal Congress is delegated the social Power to write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and have them enacted as laws in our Republic. Thus, if the specifically enumerated terms "acquire" and "possess" are nowhere to be found in our Second Amendment, no thesaurus in the world can replace those Ordained and Established by our Founding Fathers.
our supreme law of the land is that the individuals has the right to keep, bear, acquire and possess arms unconnected with any militia service. I have destroyed your idiotic arguments at every turn via supreme court precedent. you remain refuted.
Only our federal Congress has the social Power to write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and have them enacted as laws in our republic; the specific terms "acquire" and "possess" are to be found in State Constitutions and unfortunately for your Cause, those specific terms are nowhere to be found in our Second Amendment.
see, this where you are wrong. The Bill of Rights are not written laws. Those are Rights, a list, to which, "Congress shall pass no laws abridging these Rights." Where are you digging your conspiracies theories up? Rights are not Laws...............
Special pleading much? Our federal Constitution was ratified by the People in the several States. Only our federal Congress has the social Power to write words on formerly blank pieces of paper and have them enacted as laws in our republic; the specific terms "acquire" and "possess" are to be found in State Constitutions and unfortunately for your Cause, those specific terms are nowhere to be found in our Second Amendment.
