Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
dk....how does the Article I, Sec 8 use of the term "militia" to "SUPPRESS INSURRECTION and repel invasion" conform with "well regulated" in the 2nd.
It seems to me, part of the role of the militia is to stop armed citizens from illegal acts (ie insurrection) in order to protect "the people" from such acts.
|
a group of people who know how to use their weapons AND know basics of martial combat would be well regulated. well regulated was never meant to be defined as having a governmental structure of command, control, rules, guidelines, orders, etc.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
if rights are absolute.....how do you explain that the right "to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" is only subject to UNREASONABLE searches and seizures.....REASONABLE searches and seizures are ok.
|
'reasonable' is a term that was invented BY the courts when protecting a right didn't serve the needs of the law. The problem is we've gone from the founders version of 'letting the guilty go free instead of an innocent going to prison', to 'they all should go to jail, except for the obviously innocent'.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
IMO, it was not the intent of the framers to leave these rights to the whims of future legislatures, but rather to the interpretation of such vagueness to the judiciary.
|
I don't believe the judiciary was created to provide a balance between rights and laws. The judiciary was put in place to protect our rights from the encroachment of government control.