R
RD Sandman
Guest
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:wbidnejaNNpZHijSnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:
legislation.
--
If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman)
news:wbidnejaNNpZHijSnZ2dnUVZ_gWdnZ2d@westnet.com.au:
What's your point? You were declaring that the courts rewrote"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA0556FBE121Dhopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:8_KdnR8WuO-Fyy7SnZ2dnUVZ_qidnZ2d@westnet.com.au:
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA05481DEECFD9hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:abidnRwg_ay1VSzSnZ2dnUVZ_s6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
message news:joqbrv$21h$4@dont-email.me...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Ib6dnf_Bfdj9OS3SnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:192dne4J3KLMYjHSnZ2dnUVZ_rAAAAAA@bright.net...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:G5WdnawiB_1lKjHSnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:C6KdnfTcLuNdKzHSnZ2dnUVZ_ukAAAAA@bright.net...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:I4qdnU7Wj5ejqDHSnZ2dnUVZ_jydnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04F6CBA2B719hopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hrCdnbIL7JCZYTfSnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:
"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in
message news:XnsA04E929F2F8BChopewell@216.196.121.131...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:xfadnaUAL5puRTfSnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@westnet.com.au:
"SaPeIsMa" <SaPeIsMa@HotMail.com> wrote in message
news:bMGdnUgXmLFx8TfSnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@bright.net...
"dechucka" <dechucka1@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:S7KdndPBOcbvWjTSnZ2dnUVZ_r2dnZ2d@westnet.com.au...
snip
Isn't the 2nd amendment all about the militia ;-)
Get back under your rock you stupid troll
it is isn't it
Get back under your rock, you stupid AND ignorant
troll.
must suck for an aussie to point out to you what your
constitution
states
However, he is wrong. There is no requirement for
militia membership
for the right to keep and bear arms. Yes, the Second
Amendment addresses the state militias (the national
militia is addressed in ArtI(8)(16)) but what it is is a
statement that gives *a* reason for
the protection of that right.
I agree and understand that the courts have taken a very
liberal view
of what a militia is
Actually, the militia is defined in federal and state
statutes. Here is
the federal definition of its militia. It is in 10 USC
311:
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
-MISC1-
Sec.
311. Militia: composition and classes.
312. Militia duty: exemptions.
-CITE-
10 USC Sec. 311
01/03/2012 (112-90)
-EXPCITE-
TITLE 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
-HEAD-
Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
-STATUTE-
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all
able-bodied
males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided
in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who
are, or who have made
a
declaration of intention to become, citizens of the
United States and of female citizens of the United
States who are members of
the
National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the
National
Guard
and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the
members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard
or the Naval Militia.
-SOURCE-
(Aug. 10, 1956, ch. 1041, 70A Stat. 14; Pub. L. 85-861,
Sec.
1(7),
Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1439; Pub. L. 103-160, div. A,
title V, Sec. 524(a), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1656.)
Now, the different states may have different definitions of
their state
militias but, in general, they will agree with the federal
statute.
Additionally, our Supreme Court has said that militia
membership is NOT
required and has nothing to do with the right to keep and
bear arms.
as I said they have taken a very liberal view
A statute is NOT written by the courts, stupid
but it certainly is interpreted by the Courts.
Feel free to cite the cases where it was
Take as many screens as you need
The abortion cases, religion in schools
I do not believe that either of those have anything to do with
militias and what you claim is the "liberal view" they have for
what the militia is.
Care to try again without attempting to change the subject?
They have to do with the Supreme Court interpreting legislation
and i should add the death penalty laws. These have been legal or
not dependent on the supreme courts interpretatation
Only if there is a case challenging them on constitutional grounds.
The courts do not review legislation or interpret it unless there
appears to be a problem that is coming up through the court system.
They do interpret it because opinions on the same bit of legislation
change i.e. death penalty and Wade v?
What bit of legislation was interpreted in Roe v Wade? Please be
specific and show that interpretation of that legislation was the
deciding factor in the decision. Take all the screens you need.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe_v._Wade redefined the status of
abortion in the US WITHOUT legislative changes
legislation.
--
If you are trying find a laundry detergent that removes bloodstains
from clothing......perhaps, the problem is not your detergent...
You need to find a new circle of friends!!!
Sleep well, tonight.....
RD (The Sandman)