This is a discussion on What does an international treaty have to do with the 2A? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by Hopyard The point is that there are things the private sector can not do, and when that is the case there is ...
What do you think of this explanation?
To refer the power in question to the clause "to provide for common defense and general welfare" would be contrary to the established and consistent rules of interpretation, as rendering the special and careful enumeration of powers which follow the clause nugatory and improper. Such a view of the Constitution would have the effect of giving to Congress a general power of legislation instead of the defined and limited one hitherto understood to belong to them, the terms "common defense and general welfare" embracing every object and act within the purview of a legislative trust. It would have the effect of subjecting both the Constitution and laws of the several States in all cases not specifically exempted to be superseded by laws of Congress, it being expressly declared "that the Constitution of the United States and laws made in pursuance thereof shall be the supreme law of the land, and the judges of every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
Oh, I forgot, you want to change the plain meaning of the Constitution. The above words are probably offensive to you and represent some archaic 'interpretation' superceded by our 'progress.'
What say you?
In 1947 I lived on a farm. Our nearest neighbor was 1 mile in each direction. There is no way the a for profit electric company was going to run wire to that location. Even with a rural electrification act passed by congress, our neighbor didn't get electricity until about 1955. Sometimes Uncle has to step in to make things go.You claim these things (as a fact no less) would have never existed in these places but I do not believe that to be true where there is a true need and people are willing to pay there will always be a solution it just depends on if people want something bad enough.
So? At least there were attempts to ameliorate things. The right, then as now refused to consider the need for amelioration of the suffering. Again, way off topic.Hoover, hilarious attempt at actual revisionist history. Hoover was just as meddling as Roosevelt if you actually looked at the history and is partially to blame for the continued depression. If you actually considered the time period Roosevelt was in power and when the economy turned around you would realize he was president for 7 years before things turned around.
[quote]deregulation caused Enron and and the mortgage's crisis?
I didn't write that. I spoke of deregulation destroying the old line airline industry.
We have now drifted so far from the initial point of the thread I'm not going to continue in this out of respect for the owners of the site.
to be brief since we are way off topic I will take you on the attempt to ameliorate things. The problem is "just doing something" often makes matters worse.
During the depression so many rules were changed and then changed again it effectively killed any investment, because constant uncertainty in the rules of the economy scares people into not doing anything. Understanding what generation you are from it makes sense that you are reluctant to admit faults of a very charismatic, organized politician. I will simply state there is a reason the 22nd amendment was passed shortly after he died. Please do look up the Schechter brothers case it will make anyone's blood boil. As for businesses failing? Of course they do that is because they are inefficient and the market gets rid of them, government entities never fail(in terms of disappearing because they are not financially sound) because they get money from the tax payer no matter what.
In your opinion of how society should be, To each according to their needs, from each according to their ability.
Does that satisfactorily characterize your view? If not, how is your view different?
It's like a train wreck, you don't want to watch, but you just can't help yourselve once it starts...........
--that is completely uncalled for Hopyard, with respect, just because someone may not have the aptitude to pick up on something as quick as I suppose you think you do, it isn't a waste of resources to help them, as "force" is an inappropriate word here......One third (the bunch with a roughly 90 or lower IQ) are not capable of learning much and we waste our resources attempting to force them through to a HS degree, let alone have any expectation that they attend college.
Since the last few pages hasn't even had an attempt to be on topic, I'll add
I agree with Matt on this, a treaty can not overide the Constitution.Treaties are not on an equal footing with the Constitution, and no treaty can abrogate or modify and rights under the Constitution.
See Reid v. Covert from 1957.
My heroes are Veterans and My Father (who was a veteran).
I believe prayer and the Pledge of Allegiance should have REMAINED in schools, and the Ten Commandments should have REMAINED in schools, courthouses, and everywhere else it was before the ACLU got involved.
Article 1, section 10:
And of course article 1, section 8, the enumeration of powers. Congress has no powers other than these:No State shall...pass any...Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts...
I don't see anything about establishing a socialist state in there.The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;
To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;
To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;
To establish Post Offices and Post Roads;
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offenses against the Law of Nations;
To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;
To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;
To provide and maintain a Navy;
To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; And
To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.
"Trust in God with hand on sword" -Inscription on my family's coat of arms from medieval England
---Carry options: G26/MTAC, PF9/MiniTuck, PPK/Pocket, USP40/OWB---
---NOTE: I am not an expert. If I ever start acting like a know-it-all, please call me on it immediately. ---
Beyond that, they were silent. The words capitalism, socialism, communism appear nowhere in there. The words free enterprise appear nowhere in there. There is no reference to a stock market, or to a bond market. There is a clear reference to authority to tax and obligation to promote the general welfare. And it obvious that would happen through the power of taxation.
Quoting the document as you posted: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes,and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;"
Your and my argument turns on the precise meaning of the term
"general welfare" and what is permitted to promote it, and what is prohibited to promote it.
We will as a society argue till eternity over what that means. What it clearly does not mean is that there is a prohibition against government ownership and control of anything if that ownership is for the promotion of the general well being of the populous.
And now we own a car company, and an insurance company, thank you. I don't much like that at all, but it is clearly not either illegal or unconstitutional. My objection is not that we own these, but that I am not sure our collective welfare was served by making the purchase.
Again, this is about treaties and 2A. We are way off topic and being too disrespectful of Bumper. Please guys, let's cool it. We could go on forever to no point.