Is there room for compromise in gun rights vs gun control?

WRONG. Absolutely WRONG.

"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." (an excerpt from the Declaration of Independence)

Of this document, Thomas Jefferson stated:

"The Declaration of Independence... [is the] declaratory charter of our rights, and of the rights of man." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Adams Wells, 1819

Of the Liberty mentioned in that document, Jefferson wrote:

"The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them." --Thomas Jefferson: Rights of British America, 1774

The Declaration of Independence is at the head of the United States Code, the official laws of the United States. It has been cited over a hundred times as precedent in court cases, all the way up to the Supreme Court level. In one case the United States Supreme Court had this to say:

"The first official action of this nation declared the foundation of government in these words: "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. "While such declaration of principles may not have the force of organic law, or be made the basis of judicial decision as to the limits of right and duty, and while in all cases reference must be had to the organic law of the nation for such limits, yet the latter is but the body and the letter of which the former is the thought and the spirit, and it is always safe to read the letter of the Constitution in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence. No duty rests more imperatively upon the courts than the enforcement of those constitutional provisions intended to secure that equality of rights which is the foundation of free government."

Sir, the federal government does not give me Liberty. There is not a soul on this face of this earth short of Jesus himself that can withhold Liberty from his fellow man. I haven't seen Jesus, so unless you're him, I'll respect the Liberty of my fellow man.

Since the concept of unalienable Rights was established more than a decade before the ratification of the Constitution, and since there were no U.S. citizens prior to that, I'd say that any person wanting to pass through our country and / or engage in lawful pursuits has an unalienable Right to do so. And, the very nature of that word sir, means that the government has no legitimate authority to deny or circumvent the Right. I think you have the privileges and immunities mentioned in the 14th Amendment along with the other benefits of citizenship mixed up with the word immigration. Well, you cannot impose upon the unalienable Rights of others without jeopardizing mine, so pardon the Hell out of me for telling you, you're wrong and I hope you can get your head screwed back on right.

 

No. I'm not. If you aren't a citizen, you have no right to enter the US.

 

Read the fricking post and show me something, other than a left wing statute forced through Congress by a liberal Democrat in support of your position. Can't can you?

BTW, I'm more American than you.

 

The US government, under the powers granted to it by the Constitution, has the right of any and every other sovereign state - to control its borders and regulate immigration into it.

 

You want to imply that regulate means to disenfranchise people on the basis that they came here improperly when no credible "proper" method exists. Please don't embarrass yourself on this, sir, please. I've offered a permanent, full time job at $200 an hour for anyone to come here and show all us dum basses who have worked in immigration law to show us those realistic ways that foreigners can come here and engage in normal business pursuits without becoming citizens. Fifteen years plus and not a single taker!

All you have at the end of the day TOG6 is "it's illegal to come here without papers." That's it. You don't have any other reason. None whatsoever. Every pretext the anti-immigrant lobby has invented has been debunked and it all comes down to you thinking that YOU and those who think like you represent the only body capable of inviting people into the United States.

And so, in April of this year, there were no more agricultural visas left. And some small farms will not get all the crops out of the field. Prices for some things (berries seem to one of the best examples) will cost more than prime steaks. Some employers will be able to hire foreign labor and some will not - despite the guarantee of the "equal protection of the laws."

IF you incentivized employers to hire Americans and IF you helped your fellow American qualify for the jobs, then foreigners would not show up to take the jobs - wellll... unless times got so good that they were still necessary (and with your level of misguided reasoning, you would b!+ch about that as well.)

Strip all the B.S. away TOG 6. The United States Supreme Court attacked your gun rights on the basis of misapplying the Interstate Commerce Clause (Article 1 Section Eight of the Constitution.) In 1875 they used the that legal same logic based on that same section of the Constitution to give Congress a power that Congress did not have for nearly a hundred years of our existence as a nation with regards to immigration.

Either you have unalienable Rights or you don't. If YOU are a Fourteenth Amendment subject (as opposed to a Preamble Citizen), then maybe Uncle Scam owns you. He does not own me or any other person willing to claim their Rights as unalienable. If your Rights are dependent upon your citizenship, then the left can impose gun control on you the next time they are in power. If that happens, you can cry me a river because YOU will have participated in your own disenfranchisement with NO need for the left to take you down. You may as well agree with them now and exit this discussion.

 

Nope.
First you cannot disenfranchise people by not letting them enter the US when they have no right to do so.
Second, "regulate" means just that: create terms and conditions that must be met to gain entry.
The US government has the constitutional authority to do this.

 

You have not shown one, single solitary thing from all of history to show that foreigners do not have an unalienable Right to Liberty. NOT ONE!

When the left wants to "regulate" your weapons so as to make sure you cannot own them any longer, just remember YOU gave them that precedent.

You dismissed my earlier posting without reading it and checking the links. And now, you just walked into the trap that the left wanted you to. You obviously believe that Liberty is conditional; it is, by your standards, not an unalienable Right. Sorry TOG6, YOU do not have the authority you claim. And again, without quoting me statutes pushed through Congress by a liberal Democrat, I challenge you to state your case.

 

People not in this county are not protected by our constitution; our constitution gives our government the power to regulate immigration. What ever rights you think are held by foreign nationals, for whatever reason, they do not trump these two things.

 

Is there going to be an end to this petty bickering anytime soon? Or is this thread going to max out in terms of posts with an argument over unalienable vs inalienable?

 

You are absolutely WRONG. Allow me to prove it to you:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." (Section 1 of the 14th Amendment)

1) All persons born or naturalized in the United States are citizens

2) No state can abridge the privileges and immunities of citizens

3) "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

You can't get any more specific than that. You, as a citizen, have certain privileges and immunities AND unalienable Rights like Liberty. All PERSONS have an unalienable Right to Liberty AND THE "equal protection of the laws."

http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...yes-illegal-aliens-have-constitutional-rights

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article142387854.html

 

I don't entertain his argument in the slightest, and will not engage him on it - as you have seen.

 

There is NO debate about unalienable v inalienable. This is a totally different discussion. Neitehr TOG6 nor Shiva seem to be able to figure out how to start another thread in the appropriate forum.

 

Then all involved parties should simply move onto another topic of discussion. This is getting to the point of ridiculousness.

 

No, like a dedicated Democrat, you want to win on the basis of a popularity contest.

 

I am not.

How does this apply to someone born and residing in Somalia?

How does this apply to someone born and residing in Somalia?

 

So, this thread was about whether or not there was any room for compromise in the gun control debate. TOG6 gave the left the ultimate sell out compromise. He denied unalienable Rights leaving the door wide open for gun control.

What I would say is this:

The left needs to come up with a solid point or points about why they think we need gun control. What is the purpose behind it? Is there some symptom they want to address? If so, if the gun owners could help them out, would they consider having that symptom (or those symptoms) addressed by some other means than gun control?

 

Unsupportable nonsense.

 

I've answered your questions; given cites to legal authorities. Outside of relying on an unconstitutional power that the Supreme Court granted to Congress nearly a hundred years AFTER the ratification of the Constitution AND statutes forced through Congress by a liberal Democrat, you have not provided us one damn thing except your false claim that you are right.

 

Bullsh!+. You know it. You just don't have anything except hatemongering bigotry that was dreamed up by the neo-nazis using the far left to build their talking points on.

 

So you agree - the 14th amendment does not apply to a foreign national until they step foot in the US. Good.
The US government has the constitutional authority to not allow them to step foot in the US, and to deport them if they do so illegally.

 

What a stupid response! No, I did not agree with you. You should act like you have an IQ and READ my responses instead of being so dishonest. Let me repeat something for you:

You want to imply that regulate means to disenfranchise people on the basis that they came here improperly when no credible "proper" method exists. Please don't embarrass yourself on this, sir, please. I've offered a permanent, full time job at $200 an hour for anyone to come here and show all us dum basses who have worked in immigration law to show us those realistic ways that foreigners can come here and engage in normal business pursuits without becoming citizens. Fifteen years plus and not a single taker!

You don't get to decide who is eligible for LIBERTY. People were born with that Right. Look up the freaking word Liberty and tell me how in the Hell you are going to decide who gets "your" permission to qualify for it.

 

Post 493
You said the 14th Amendment "doesn't [apply] until they set foot in the United States." Your words.
Thus, you DO agree: the 14th amendment does not apply to a foreign national until they step foot in the US.

The US government has the constitutional authority to not allow them to step foot in the US, and to deport them if they do so illegally.

 

Having the equal protection of the laws and having Liberty are two different things.

This country operated for almost a hundred years with foreigners coming and going as the states so desired. People conducted business. Nonwhites could not even become citizens yet they came here in droves to take advantage of opportunities willingly offered.

You're losing this debate, son, because you're wrong and you have nothing... nothing in history... nothing in law. You just want to take a giant sh!| on Liberty. Go ahead and when YOUR Rights get flushed down the toilet, you'll have no
one except yourself to blame.

Where in the Hell did you go to school that you thought the 14th Amendment granted Liberty?

 

Some folks didn't get the memo so I'm trying again. This is yet ANOTHER effort to appeal to the anti-gun people to answer the OP's question.

 

Irrelevant. As you said: until you get there, the Constitution doesn't apply.
The US government has the constitutional authority to not allow them to step foot in the US, and to deport them if they do so illegally.
Funny how you refuse to argue this point.