×
Login Register an account
Top Submissions Explore Upgoat Search Random Subverse Random Post Colorize! Site Rules
12

Why not go through the discussions that the states had about whether or not to ratify the Constitution in 1787 and see what relevant legal points you can pull out regarding the right to bear arms freedom of religion and other things. There's juicy stuff in here. Especially the assumptions that the f

submitted by Crackinjokes to anything 2 monthsFeb 26, 2024 19:45:20 ago (+12/-0)     (archive.org)

https://archive.org/details/cu31924020874099/page/n14/mode/1up

Why not go through the discussions that the states had about whether or not to ratify the Constitution in 1787 and see what relevant legal points you can pull out regarding the right to bear arms freedom of religion and other things. There's juicy stuff in here. Especially the assumptions that the Free people assumed that they felt didn't need to be written down but need to be understood as the context for the words in the constitution.

These were the discussions people had about the wording of the Constitution and the setup and the structure of the future government when it was being discussed and when the states actually had to ratify the Constitution that Thomas Jefferson and others had come up with. You're not going to get a better source about what people actually thought and meant about the words in the Constitution than this.


3 comments block


[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 1 point 2 monthsFeb 26, 2024 21:18:24 ago (+1/-0)

i will say this the constitution is incomplete without the bill of rights. without the bill of rights its just another toothless paper.

1) right of assembly, of the press, freedom of movement, freedom of religion and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


2) the right to bear arms and to establish a state militia

3) No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

4)The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

5)Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

6)Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have
compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

7)In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


8)Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

9)The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

10)The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

[ - ] Lost_In_The_Thinking 1 point 2 monthsFeb 26, 2024 20:03:01 ago (+1/-0)

This is exactly what various states did before and up to Southern secession regarding the right to secede from the union. After fighting for their right to be sovereign states, which is what their status was after the treaty with England was signed, they were unwilling to enter into another union that could not be left unless there were well understood assurances that they could. This is well documented in all of the ratification conventions among the signatory states, especially those that held off ratifying for quite a while because they didn't trust the newly formed republic.

The treaty with the England was formed as a collective treaty with England and 13 separate, sovereign states or nations. It states as follows:

His Brittanic Majesty acknowledges the said United States, viz., New Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay, Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to be free sovereign and Independent States; that he treats with them as such, and for himself his Heirs & Successors, relinquishes all claims to the Government, Propriety, and Territorial Rights of the same and every Part thereof.

[ - ] Crackinjokes [op] 2 points 2 monthsFeb 26, 2024 20:53:52 ago (+2/-0)

That's good info. Thank you.