Who Should Protect Our Rights...Federal or State Government - Page 3

Who Should Protect Our Rights...Federal or State Government

This is a discussion on Who Should Protect Our Rights...Federal or State Government within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Rob P. Having the individual States define our rights is contrary to the Constitution. The Constitution grants us the right to interstate ...

View Poll Results: Who Should Protect/Guarantee our 2A rights?

Voters
129. You may not vote on this poll
  • Federal Government

    88 68.22%
  • State Government

    41 31.78%
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 110

Thread: Who Should Protect Our Rights...Federal or State Government

  1. #31
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,915

    Well said, Rob P

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob P. View Post
    Having the individual States define our rights is contrary to the Constitution.

    The Constitution grants us the right to interstate commerce. It grants us the right to travel. It grants us the right to the privileges and immunities of the several states. These are NOT "states' rights" they are federal guarantees.

    On top of that, the BOR specifically prevents the gov from taking our weapons and the supreme court has upheld that (Heller) it is an individual right. The 2nd has not been incorporated via the 14th yet but that is in the works and will be done soon.

    Firearms legislation is NOT a matter of "states rights." It was a right ceded by the States to the Federal Government by the signing and ratification of the Constitution.
    Well said. Some folks here need to get out of the 19th century and fantasy interpretations and into the 21st century and reality.

    We are NOW one nation. There is no going back without extreme calamity. The rights enumerated in the BOR must apply to all regardless of what state you live in. There is no losing position with such an interpretation. The other way around has in the past and will in the future result in states disrespecting individual rights.


  2. #32
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,863
    You missed two answers in your Poll..... the Judicical Branch, and

    ------------------------------- US -----------------------------------------

    that's who needs to really make sure our rights are protected.

    While you are debating the glory of the Fedl Govt... you might also debate the fact that in the 21st Century we still have a Natl Guard that is controlled by the STATES, another element of the Constitution.... and State Rights are also in there... .....

    including the right to secede from the Union.

  3. #33
    Restricted Member Array SelfDefense's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tucson
    Posts
    2,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    We are NOW one nation.
    No, we are still 50 independent, sovereign, United States. Your misperception and continued grasping for that which is not so is not helpful in solving our common problems. I don't know why you want to dissolve the states but rest assured, it will not happen.

    There is no going back without extreme calamity. The rights enumerated in the BOR must apply to all regardless of what state you live in.
    You still don't get it. The rights enumerated DO apply to all. They are God given rights. The Bill of Rights ensures the Federal government will not infringe on those rights. Why is that concept so difficult to understand?

    There is no losing position with such an interpretation.
    Huh? That is not our nation. We are a nation of United States. The name of our nation is the United States of America. You might want to erase our history and certainly you can lobby for the dissolution of the Union, but you won't get much support.

    The other way around has in the past and will in the future result in states disrespecting individual rights.
    The people make up the governments of the states. It is the responsbility of the people do protect our rights. We are the government.

    Perhaps you have never read the Federalist Papers. Maybe that is why you don't understand our system of government or why it is necessary.

    Here are some excerpts from Federalist 45:

    The State government will have the advantage of the Federal government, whether we compare them in respect to the immediate dependence of the one on the other; to the weight of personal influence which each side will possess; to the powers respectively vested in them; to the predilection and probable support of the people; to the disposition and faculty of resisting and frustrating the measures of each other.

    The State governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or organization of the former. Without the intervention of the State legislatures, the President of the United States cannot be elected at all. They must in all cases have a great share in his appointment, and will, perhaps, in most cases, of themselves determine it. The Senate will be elected absolutely and exclusively by the State legislatures. Even the House of Representatives, though drawn immediately from the people, will be chosen very much under the influence of that class of men, whose influence over the people obtains for themselves an election into the State legislatures. Thus, each of the principal branches of the federal government will owe its existence more or less to the favor of the State governments, and must consequently feel a dependence, which is much more likely to beget a disposition too obsequious than too overbearing towards them. On the other side, the component parts of the State governments will in no instance be indebted for their appointment to the direct agency of the federal government, and very little, if at all, to the local influence of its members.
    Hopyard, if you are still reading this most important treatise, please note the passage I have bolded:

    The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.
    The operations of the federal government will be most extensive and important in times of war and danger; those of the State governments, in times of peace and security. As the former periods will probably bear a small proportion to the latter, the State governments will here enjoy another advantage over the federal government. The more adequate, indeed, the federal powers may be rendered to the national defense, the less frequent will be those scenes of danger which might favor their ascendancy over the governments of the particular States.
    Again, why do you want to destroy the great nation for which the Founders shed their precious blood?

  4. #34
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,915

    Say what?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eagleks View Post
    While you are debating the glory of the Fedl Govt... you might also debate the fact that in the 21st Century we still have a Natl Guard that is controlled by the STATES, another element of the Constitution.... and State Rights are also in there... .....

    including the right to secede from the Union.
    My goodness!!!!!!
    You can't be serious.
    Can you say," squished like a bug. " Even if the question of secession had not been settled 150 years ago, there is no way it could happen in today's world. SPLAT. There is no state that could stand up to the Federal government.

  5. #35
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,915

    Utterly inconsistent nonsense

    Quote Originally Posted by SelfDefense View Post
    You still don't get it. The rights enumerated DO apply to all.
    HMMM. Then why in the world do you persistently come here to argue that it is perfectly OK for the states to violate those rights and moreover argue that the Federal government has no role in protecting those rights against the individual state's interest?

    You are very inconsistent in both your views and your arguments. That's OK, we all are inconsistent and we all hold self contradictory views on various subject, but how in the world can the rights apply to all (as you state) because they are G-D given, but then argue it is OK for the states to violate those rights?

    Do you expect the citizens of the states to actually physically need to fight to retain their rights? What a ridiculous position.

  6. #36
    Distinguished Member Array P7fanatic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Texan in NWFlorida
    Posts
    1,588

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by PatrioticRick View Post
    I voted Federal, but wanted to vote both. I feel it's both their jobs to protect our rights.
    +1

    Although with an increasing percentage of our elected officials in Washington acting as though they're working for themselves, special interests and lobbyists rather than 'for us', I think it may be up to the 'states and US' that will have to protect those rights.



    "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." -Thomas Jefferson

    "Liberalism is a Mental Disorder." -Michael Savage

    GOOD Gun Control is being able to hit your target! -Myself

  7. #37
    Senior Member Array agentmel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    FL
    Posts
    509
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Do you expect the citizens of the states to actually physically need to fight to retain their rights? What a ridiculous position.
    Without the threat of exactly that, what is to prevent either the state or federal government from making us all slaves? Do you expect that your rights will retain themselves?

    "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." - Thomas Jefferson

    Mel
    The Ethics of Liberty
    LewRockwell.com
    The Survival Podcast
    How long have we watered the Tree of Deceit with the blood of patriots?

  8. #38
    Senior Member Array Shadowsbane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    HMMM. Then why in the world do you persistently come here to argue that it is perfectly OK for the states to violate those rights and moreover argue that the Federal government has no role in protecting those rights against the individual state's interest?

    You are very inconsistent in both your views and your arguments. That's OK, we all are inconsistent and we all hold self contradictory views on various subject, but how in the world can the rights apply to all (as you state) because they are G-D given, but then argue it is OK for the states to violate those rights?

    Do you expect the citizens of the states to actually physically need to fight to retain their rights? What a ridiculous position.

    He didn't say that it was right for states to do so, but that it was in their power. Governments are not particularly known for being especially moral.
    Now, we must all fear evil men. But there is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men.

    www.Lonelymountainleather.com

  9. #39
    VIP Member Array Guns and more's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Fl
    Posts
    2,391
    The whole purpose of the Bill of Rights was to limit the power of the federal government. Our founding fathers were wise. Less federal government is better government. I voted state.

  10. #40
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Why would any government want to protect the individual rights of citizens? It serves no purpose to them. We are in a constant battle, one side trying to protect its rights, the other tryin to usurp them.

    Its the individual that is responsible for protecting his rights. When the government passes a law they further restrict your rights. Sometimes this is good, but its the people that must make sure the government never gets to powerful.

    Michael

  11. #41
    VIP Member Array boricua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    3,873
    I say Federal; for some reason it makes more sense to me.
    Duty, Honor, Country...MEDIC!!!
    ¡Cuánto duele crecer, cuan hondo es el dolor de alzarse en puntillas y observar con temblores de angustia, esa cosa tremenda, que es la vida del hombre! - René Marqués

  12. #42
    BAC
    BAC is offline
    VIP Member Array BAC's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    2,292
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    Even if the question of secession had not been settled 150 years ago, there is no way it could happen in today's world.
    Do you remember why there was such a bitter rift between the Northern and Southern states that resulted in the civil war? Secession was certainly addressed, but never settled.

    Still, that's a history topic, and probably beyond the scope of this conversation. I've said my piece earlier.


    -B
    RIP, Jeff Dorr: 1964 - July 17, 2009. You will be missed.


    Defensive Carry Search Tips


    Step 1 - Choose a subforum on right side under "Search in Forum(s)"
    Step 2 - Type general topic of interest in "Search by Keyword" textbox.
    Step 3 - Read results and refine/repeat as necessary.

  13. #43
    Member Array farmerbyron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    187
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    There is no state that could stand up to the Federal government.
    I'll bet no one thought that 13 little colonies could stand up to the mighty British Empire either.

    I, for one, am glad that our founding fathers pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor against overwhelming odds.

    I'm not calling for a current secession or anything I am just pointing out what some people call impossible.
    The Second Amendment ...... Because crime SHOULD be a hazardous occupation.

    If you want to piss off a conservative, lie to him.
    If you want to piss off a liberal, tell him the truth.

  14. #44
    Member Array ReticentXD40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    WA
    Posts
    35
    The rights should be protected on a federal level by we the people. The federal level is the baseline by which all the states must play by, and if they don't, then it's not valid, however, this should be "self-governed" by us, to ensure the safekeeping of our constitutional rights.

  15. #45
    Distinguished Member Array Rugergirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    1,954
    I didn't vote, because the correct option wasn't listed.
    Who should protect our rights?
    Well we should.
    We can do that by being educated intelligent voters, quite a rarity these days.
    Disclaimer: The posts made by this member are only the members opinion, not a reflection on anyone else, nor the group, and should not be cause for anyone to get their undergarments wedged in an uncomfortable position.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Is the strongest reason for 2A is to protect against tyranny in Government?
    By Thanis in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 94
    Last Post: October 2nd, 2008, 09:52 AM
  2. Sign the petition today – together we can protect our Second Amendment rights.
    By goawayfarm in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: January 31st, 2008, 10:46 PM
  3. Put down your guns the Government will protect you!!
    By airbornerangerboogie in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: April 6th, 2007, 10:48 PM
  4. If Government can't protect driver's info why is gun registration a good idea?
    By Dakotaranger in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: December 1st, 2006, 06:36 PM
  5. Senate Votes to Protect Second Amendment Rights During Emergencies
    By dr_cmg in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: July 16th, 2006, 12:09 AM

Search tags for this page

government infringing on our rights

,
government is the protector of our rights
,
how does our government defend gun regulation?
,

how does the government protect our rights

,
how each branch of the goverment protects our rights
,
in what way was this amendment originally only binding on the federal government?
,
safety of amendments to safeguard our schools
,
should the federal goverment have any say on the second amendment
,

what governments were made to protect our rights

,
what is the legal source of federal government to protect civil rights?
,
which government focuses on protecting the rights
,
who should protect the rights of the children? state or federal government ?
Click on a term to search for related topics.