Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
28. Where was this argument when you were peddling articles on behalf of the Brennan Center?
Thu Feb 4, 2016, 05:39 PM
Feb 2016

It seems disingenuous that you would offer an article that cites a state constitutional case as a precedent for your selective interpretation of the federal constitution; then, when that same case is returned to you as proof against your interpretations you claim state constitutional cases have no merit in deciding federal constitutional issues.

Perhaps, then, you could offer some contemporaneous citations -- from the founders of the federal constitution in general and the Bill of Rights in particular -- that would support your argument.

Coincidentally, I couldn't help but notice you are quite content with state constitutions legalizing marijuana even though federal regulations still prohibit non-medicinal possession and use. At glance first this seems, shall we say, "selective."

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

This leapt out at me -- Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #1
You make a lot of assumptions without evidence SecularMotion Feb 2016 #2
Why don't you post in your group Duckhunter935 Feb 2016 #3
Then your month-old article is incomplete. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #8
We could follow the Constitution and safeinOhio Feb 2016 #4
I think you're referring to the Militia Act... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #5
Citation, please. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #9
sure safeinOhio Feb 2016 #10
That's not the Constitution; that's a law. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #11
The Second Arms act of 1903 safeinOhio Feb 2016 #13
Okay -- and? My points still stand regardless of the age. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #14
So does mine safeinOhio Feb 2016 #15
Your beliefs have no basis in the contemporaneous statements of the founders. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #17
If you want to let states regulate gun laws safeinOhio Feb 2016 #20
"let" ?????? discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #21
So a state can ban all safeinOhio Feb 2016 #23
No, why? n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2016 #26
Please elaborate as I honestly do not understand the intent of your reply. Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #22
State Constitutions are not the Federal one. safeinOhio Feb 2016 #24
Nope. beevul Feb 2016 #25
Where was this argument when you were peddling articles on behalf of the Brennan Center? Nuclear Unicorn Feb 2016 #28
incorporation is very real gejohnston Feb 2016 #29
It would be great... beevul Feb 2016 #18
Better raise the... Puha Ekapi Feb 2016 #6
LOL...wonder if this guy knows shooting people at any age is against the law? ileus Feb 2016 #7
"federal law allows licensed gun dealers to sell rifles to people as young as 18." Lizzie Poppet Feb 2016 #12
OMGZ LEGAL ADULTS CAN BUY RIFLES!!! beevul Feb 2016 #19
They can also sell bicycles to people as young as 18, benEzra Feb 2016 #27
Canada is aged 18 gejohnston Feb 2016 #16
Actually you cannot buy a handgun, legally, from anyone if you're under 21 Press Virginia Feb 2016 #30
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Gun Control & RKBA»There’s a simple way to r...»Reply #28