View Single Post
  #96  
Old 09-01-2019, 01:27 PM
thorny locust's Avatar
thorny locust is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 1,468
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abatis View Post
An example -- interestingly on the point of the RKBA -- is explained in Presser v Illinois:
"It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States as well as of the states,
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abatis View Post
BUT, those regulations were only impressed upon those citizens "enrolled and notified" in the militia, not regular, private citizens who were not members of the militia. This is a long standing principle of law, that only the people expressly addressed in the law are considered to be bound by it .
The government may at the time have decided to only impress those regulations on those citizens enrolled and notified in the militia.

However, I don't see how you can simultaneously claim that the word "militia" undoubtedly applies to all citizens capable of bearing arms, and that it only applies to those who are enrolled and notified. Either the government had the regulatory power to impose all those regulations on "all citizens capable of bearing arms", whether or not it chose to in 1792; or it didn't -- in which case, where are all the objections from 1792, when most of the founders were still around? -- ; or the word "militia" doesn't apply to all citizens capable of bearing arms, but only to those officially enrolled in a state or federal militia -- in which case the 2nd doesn't apply to individuals except as part of such a militia.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Abatis View Post
The philosophy of unalienable rights precludes the argument that they exist between private citizens (say criminal / victim) or business and customer. Unalienable means that these natural rights which you possessed before entering society, are of such an intrinsic value to being human they can not be willingly surrendered to the care and control of society (government). You can not legitimately sell yourself into slavery or sell your life, that does not mean that you can not be vanquished or conquered and placed into slavery or even killed.

Unalienable rights only apply in a government / governed dynamic
.
So people have no right not be be murdered or enslaved as long as this is done by a private actor?

That's, I'll just say, an interesting position.

But I'm pretty sure that's a very large part of why most people agree to be governed in the first place: so they won't be murdered or enslaved by anybody who happens along.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abatis View Post

CHANGE MY MIND . . .

.
I kind of doubt that's possible.

Poking holes in your argument is mostly for the purpose of dissuading anybody else from believing it.