NationStates

First, let's start with the 10th amendment.

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.

This amendment states that states are free to do anything they please unless they are prohibited by the constitution to do so. This means that the 1st though 8th amendments are not binding to the states.

Next, let's look at the 14th amendment. Section 1 since that deals the rights.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
This basically states that no matter what state you live in you are a citizen of the USA

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
This does not give you protection under the bill of rights. It literally just bans discrimination based on the state of origin.

nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This gives people the rights from the 5th-8th amendments and protects everyone equally under the law.

This clearly means that your 1st-4th amendments are not protected in the 14th amendment. Thus the right to keep and bear arms is not either.

Yes I just through the 1st and 4th amendments under the bus but it is worth it to stop gun rights activists from claiming they have a right to a gun in every state

Keshiland wrote:First, let's start with the 10th amendment.

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.

This amendment states that states are free to do anything they please unless they are prohibited by the constitution to do so. This means that the 1st though 8th amendments are not binding to the states.

Next, let's look at the 14th amendment. Section 1 since that deals the rights.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
This basically states that no matter what state you live in you are a citizen of the USA

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
This does not give you protection under the bill of rights. It literally just bans discrimination based on the state of origin.

nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This gives people the rights from the 5th-8th amendments and protects everyone equally under the law.

This clearly means that your 1st-4th amendments are not protected in the 14th amendment. Thus the right to keep and bear arms is not either.

The key words you are missing are liberty, property, and due process. The first amendment is liberty, the second is both a liberty and property, the third is all three, and the fourth is due process.

Congrats I just destroyed your argument as the 1st-4th are protected by the 14th.

Keshiland wrote:Yes I just through the 1st and 4th amendments under the bus but it is worth it to stop gun rights activists from claiming they have a right to a gun in every state

So you would rather that people don't have the right to free speech, have troops stationed in their homes without their permission, and allowing the police to raid your house at will, all so the second doesn't exist?

You do know that DPRK exists right?

Thermodolia wrote:

Keshiland wrote:First, let's start with the 10th amendment.

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.

This amendment states that states are free to do anything they please unless they are prohibited by the constitution to do so. This means that the 1st though 8th amendments are not binding to the states.

Next, let's look at the 14th amendment. Section 1 since that deals the rights.

Section 1.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.
This basically states that no matter what state you live in you are a citizen of the USA

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
This does not give you protection under the bill of rights. It literally just bans discrimination based on the state of origin.

nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This gives people the rights from the 5th-8th amendments and protects everyone equally under the law.

This clearly means that your 1st-4th amendments are not protected in the 14th amendment. Thus the right to keep and bear arms is not either.

The key words you are missing are liberty, property, and due process. The first amendment is liberty, the second is both a liberty and property, the third is all three, and the fourth is due process.

Congrats I just destroyed your argument as the 1st-4th are protected by the 14th.

A state law can be no one is allowed to own a gun. Then if they violate that law and are found guilty that is due prosses.

Gun Manufacturers wrote:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

Thank you SCOTUS for showing up random internet people

Thermodolia wrote:

Keshiland wrote:Yes I just through the 1st and 4th amendments under the bus but it is worth it to stop gun rights activists from claiming they have a right to a gun in every state

So you would rather that people don't have the right to free speech, have troops stationed in their homes without their permission, and allowing the police to raid your house at will, all so the second doesn't exist?

You do know that DPRK exists right?

No liberal state will touch the 1st or 3rd or 4th so I ain't worried my family resides in liberal states. They would be fine. Conservative states IDK and IDC

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:The key words you are missing are liberty, property, and due process. The first amendment is liberty, the second is both a liberty and property, the third is all three, and the fourth is due process.

Congrats I just destroyed your argument as the 1st-4th are protected by the 14th.

A state law can be no one is allowed to own a gun. Then if they violate that law and are found guilty that is due prosses.

Ok... You do know that SCOTUS ruled that such state laws violate the due process clause of the 14th, right?

Thermodolia wrote:

Gun Manufacturers wrote:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald_v._City_of_Chicago

Thank you SCOTUS for showing up random internet people

Lol 5-4 decision just waits within a decade that will be overturned.

Per the 14th amendment, yes.

You're all going to die in the war soon enough anyways, when you hide in the dirt, praying to your beloved gods and leaders as we reduce your worlds to but glass and bring ruin and extinction upon your species!

Heretics.

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:So you would rather that people don't have the right to free speech, have troops stationed in their homes without their permission, and allowing the police to raid your house at will, all so the second doesn't exist?

You do know that DPRK exists right?

No liberal state will touch the 1st or 3rd or 4th so I ain't worried my family resides in liberal states. They would be fine. Conservative states IDK and IDC

Ok let's get this through your head. The first 4 amendments aren't for the states but the fucking federal government. If you take them away the federal government can: ban any form of speech, ban any religion, put federal troops in your house, and have the FBI raid your house at will.

You and your state can't do anything because federal law is supreme.

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:Thank you SCOTUS for showing up random internet people

Lol 5-4 decision just waits within a decade that will be overturned.

Go live in NK since you hate freedom so much

Thermodolia wrote:

Keshiland wrote:
No liberal state will touch the 1st or 3rd or 4th so I ain't worried my family resides in liberal states. They would be fine. Conservative states IDK and IDC

Ok let's get this through your head. The first 4 amendments aren't for the states but the fucking federal government. If you take them away the federal government can: ban any form of speech, ban any religion, put federal troops in your house, and have the FBI raid your house at will.

You and your state can't do anything because federal law is supreme.

Thats what I was saying. They only apply to the FEDERAL governent

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:Ok let's get this through your head. The first 4 amendments aren't for the states but the fucking federal government. If you take them away the federal government can: ban any form of speech, ban any religion, put federal troops in your house, and have the FBI raid your house at will.

You and your state can't do anything because federal law is supreme.

Thats what I was saying. They only apply to the FEDERAL governent

That would only be true if they didn't qualify as privileges or immunities granted to US citizens.

Unfortunately for your argument, they do count for that, which makes your argument bunk.

Galloism wrote:

Keshiland wrote:
Thats what I was saying. They only apply to the FEDERAL governent

That would only be true if they didn't qualify as privileges or immunities granted to US citizens.

Unfortunately for your argument, they do count for that, which makes your argument bunk.

They are not as much privilege, as they are the individual citizens free right. Least the first 4 are, cause striking the second also basically takes away your right to self-defense. While same thing with the first, allows any and all speech to be banned. That is honestly what dictatorships are, so they are not privilege. Just a Humans birth right.

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:Ok let's get this through your head. The first 4 amendments aren't for the states but the fucking federal government. If you take them away the federal government can: ban any form of speech, ban any religion, put federal troops in your house, and have the FBI raid your house at will.

You and your state can't do anything because federal law is supreme.

Thats what I was saying. They only apply to the FEDERAL governent

And guess what state governments can't tell the federal government to fuck off.

Thermodolia wrote:

Keshiland wrote:
Thats what I was saying. They only apply to the FEDERAL governent

And guess what state governments can't tell the federal government to fuck off.

Congress can only make laws that the constitution allows.

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:And guess what state governments can't tell the federal government to fuck off.

Congress can only make laws that the constitution allows.

Same with States, if anything violates the Constitution. It can be repealed very easily on that ground a lone.

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:And guess what state governments can't tell the federal government to fuck off.

Congress can only make laws that the constitution allows.

If the 1st-4th amendments don't exist then congress can ban any religion, political belief, or any form of speech they want.
They can also use the FBI to raid the homes of political opponents at will. You are arguing for a dictatorship

Principality of the Raix wrote:

Keshiland wrote:
Congress can only make laws that the constitution allows.

Same with States, if anything violates the Constitution. It can be repealed very easily on that ground a lone.

Not really because of the 10th amendment. That amendment states that the constitution must prohibit the states from doing things while it must grant the federal government the right to do things.

Principality of the Raix wrote:

Keshiland wrote:
Congress can only make laws that the constitution allows.

Same with States, if anything violates the Constitution. It can be repealed very easily on that ground a lone.

However if the first 4 amendments don't exist the Feds can do as they please

Thermodolia wrote:

Keshiland wrote:
Congress can only make laws that the constitution allows.

If the 1st-4th amendments don't exist then congress can ban any religion, political belief, or any form of speech they want.
They can also use the FBI to raid the homes of political opponents at will. You are arguing for a dictatorship

I am arguing that the STATES do not have to follow the 1st 4 not that CONGRESS does not have to follow the 1st 4.

Keshiland wrote:

Thermodolia wrote:So you would rather that people don't have the right to free speech, have troops stationed in their homes without their permission, and allowing the police to raid your house at will, all so the second doesn't exist?

You do know that DPRK exists right?

No liberal state will touch the 1st or 3rd or 4th so I ain't worried my family resides in liberal states. They would be fine. Conservative states IDK and IDC

But what happens when the Federal Government does it, or when the state does it to save money? And why do you think that the liberal states will not clamp on speech, house troops in your homes, or arrest you for any reason? What of the police forces storming your house just on a hunch?