j8ear

I think that is a fair assessment.

OK, with regards to your part one, as I understand what you pose. I am torn on the principle of STARE DECISIS. I am for reproducable results, and things being decide as they have in the past. However, after reading a recent essay equating the Heap connundrum with this principle I am confused.

Here is the article from Julian Sanchez at reasononline here

Precedent has allowed us to reach a point where (do I repeat this often enough?) where interstate commerce now includes non-commercial activity, conducted exclusively within a single states borders.

Is this reasonable? Is this valid? Precedent seems to have become a dangerous thing, especially in light of these "precedents."

I've got a lot to learn that's for sure.

On to part two.

Essentially I disagree wholeheartedly about the framers intent. We have volumes of documentation, penned and debated by the framers, we have the circumstances surrounding what inspired and drove them to create that which we credit them with framing, and we have the text of the documentation itself. Their intent, imho is unambiguous, and abundant. I just have trouble grasping this as a joke.

However, even more importantly, we know they gave us a mechanism to change their intent, as our circumstances warranted and evolved, and the needs became different.

This is where I am the most strict constructionist.

This is what I find concerning. We have rules and methodology in place to effect the changes we need, BADLY need I could argue, but instead we piss around with supreme court justices, and corrupt politicians.

MY goodness this is OUR COUNTRY...not the supreme courts, not the politicians.

I have repeated it before, and I'll be damned if that I can't remember who penned it , but it was on this very board:

Since when did the constitution become a tool to protect the government from the people?

We need to change the second ammendment, I fully believe that...but we should do it properly....not with unconstitutional nonsense like DC, which has enacted an out right BAN on firearms, failed at the stated goals, and corrupted an entire generation with it's failed and unconstitutional power grab.

If we want the government to take land and give it to the highest campaign contributors...lets allow them to do so.

If we want women to handle their poor choices with the ability to abort babies, let's give it to them.

If we want politicians to be run unencumbered by spoken political opposition 30 days before an election...lets give it to them.

I don't know what is up and what is down anymore.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.