S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,498
Posts545,440
Members14,414
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 916 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 916 Likes: 1 |
True Natural Rights are not fungible, and are not dependent on the will of a majority. Or on human will at all. .... Natural rights transcend majoritarian will. Majorities control policies - not rights. Greg - This is a nice, idealistic notion. But tell me please, if True Natural Rights are not dependent on human will at all, who do I ask to find out what they are? In my world the Bill of Rights is an exemplary product of human will.
Last edited by Gunflint Charlie; 02/28/07 08:43 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,155
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,155 |
True Natural Rights are not fungible, and are not dependent on the will of a majority. Or on human will at all.
Natural rights transcend majoritarian will. Majorities control policies - not rights.
Greg: I'm curious to know the "true natural rights" to which you refer. Who gets to define a "true natural right?" Is there a universal consensus on "natural rights?"
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,812
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 6,812 |
Jay, you'd have to admit that there is such a thing as natural law or the unavoidable putting to use of one's God-given equipment; i.e., "run" fast, "bite" deep, "think" up new employment for the jawbone of an ass. As for natural rights, I'm inclined to agree; give em a Magna Charta and they'll take a Bill of Rights. Oddly, in a nice, comfy social compact where you don't have to stay up all night pulling guard, rolling over and exposing one's belly is always in demand.
jack
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 986
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 986 |
Not this bill, JM, lots of gun control bills. Quoting from this site: http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/Vizzard3.htm Note that it took two years of staff study for Dodd's first GC bill - and you think he wrote one up and whipped it through in 3 months? How long it took to for staff to study one bill has absolutely NOTHING to do with any other bill. If GCA'68 had the same provisions as the other than it would be a valid point. However, it does not, they have completely different provisions. They are not the same so there is no valid comparison. You suggest that the law was written prior to the letter. Fine, let's make that assumption. Is it your opinion that laws are NOT amended, rewritten, or revised througout the lesilative process? Of course they are. Could Dodd have proposed revising the proposed law? Of course he could. If you have any documented proof that the law was written ahead of time with these provisions that are similar to NLW'38, then I'm all ears. Otherwise it's nothing more than your unsubstantiated opinion which is not a metaphysical fact. I think I have answered that [question about Dingle] sufficiently. No you evaded answering my question about why Dingle compared the GAC'68 to NLW'38. You stated "Probably because Rep. John Dingell, in a hearing before Dodd's committee, compared the proposed legislation to the 1938 Nazi law! If you were accused of copying something, wouldn't you want to check it out? Do you really imagine that on such a controversial topic, Dodd could read a document in mid-July, draw up a "near verbatim copy" and make it a law by October?" That answers nothing about why Dingle mentioned the laws were alike. You only talked about why Sen. Tydings attacked Dingle. Nice try. Now for the third time: Why did Dingle compare GCA'68 to NLW'38? Could you fill us in by comparing 'near verbatim' sections? Certainly, I will not however, type out both laws for you since you claim to have read these. In NWL'38 Section II Manufacture of Firearms and Ammunition requires a license for those who want to manufacture firearms and ammunition as does section 923 Licensing of GCA'68. I also mentioned specific points where these two laws are alike in one of my earlier posts. Now it's your turn to pick some sections from both laws for us to discuss.
Last edited by JM; 02/28/07 06:26 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
MS, on Oxford, were you there? A confrontation between Walker's men and the military was in the square, recorded by my CBC Television crew. Walker's troop formed at one end and the airborne at the other, illuminated by street lights piercing the trees. The infantry was at ease while the civilians, throwing rocks and bottles advanced across the square. Then it formed a line, fixed bayonets with a hair-raising snick-sound, advanced several steps, stopped and lunged forward their bayonets, letting out a roar. They moved forward, lunging and shouting, and the protesters drifted away. There was violence on campus and elsewhere as I mentioned earlier. It was comforting to see the 82nd with their MGs set up behind sandbags across from my little hotel the next morning. There were no rooms available so my bed was a newspaper---I think the Memphis Press-Scimitar---on the hotel floor. Nice town. I didn't have time to look for Mr. Faulkner.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,583
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,583 |
King, Check out the state laws of California, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, and the local laws of Chicago, New York and San Francisco. It has happened.
Registration comes first. It's an awful decision; be compliant or be a felon.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 9,350 |
Yeti, I don't have to check for confirmation. I believe what members tell me here. Thanks. We have crazy laws, too: you'll do more time for killing a moose out of season than a person any time of the year.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 986
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 986 |
[Greg: I'm curious to know the "true natural rights" to which you refer. Who gets to define a "true natural right?" Is there a universal consensus on "natural rights?" John Locke was the one of the most influential English philosophers. His writings on "natural rights" were a major influence on the Founding Fathers. "Natural rights are universal rights that are seen as inherent in the nature of people and not contingent on human actions or beliefs." When you're not reading NWL'38 or GCA'68 check it out.
Last edited by JM; 02/28/07 08:21 PM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 916 Likes: 1
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 916 Likes: 1 |
Oddly, in a nice, comfy social compact where you don't have to stay up all night pulling guard, rolling over and exposing one's belly is always in demand. Apt observation Jack. I wish more were in the space between the belly rollers and the obsessively on guard. Jay
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,129 Likes: 198
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,129 Likes: 198 |
Well, that, at least, would be the plan. We'll see how it goes as the population is further diluted with members who have no knowledge or sense of U.S. history, ethics, and morals. But we be proud to be the melting pot. Is there as point at which the good part of "melting pot" becomes less than good?
|
|
|
|
|