Reply to Thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tweetr" data-source="post: 3944695" data-attributes="member: 5183">Well, actually you are misstating both those rights. We must accurately state them before we can evaluate absoluteness.Yes, I am referring in this context to our Consitutional rights.The Second Amendment right, stated in its essence, is to keep and bear arms. The protection given is &quot;shall not be violated.&quot; The weapons you posit are not limited in the Second Amendment, which only specifies &quot;arms.&quot; It does not in any way limit &quot;arms.&quot; It does in the nominative absolute clause give more information that the &quot;arms&quot; in view are in fact military (&quot;militia&quot;) arms. In that sense the nature of the &quot;arms&quot; is not limited as you posit.The First Amendment right, stated in its essence, is &quot;Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.&quot; The right is freedom of speech, while the protection is &quot;Congress shall make no law.&quot; The prohibition against making law is in fact absolute with respect to abridging the freedom of speech. &quot;No law&quot; leaves no room for exception, Holmes&#039; absurd reasoning in Schenk notwithstanding.Which brings us to the subject of this thread, the Fourth Amendment.Stated in its essence the right guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment is the right to be secure. The protection is &quot;shall not be violated.&quot; For further understanding just fill in the blanks. Whose right to be secure? &quot;Of the people&quot;. That&#039;s easy enough. You are a person, I am a person, we are &quot;the people.&quot;To be secure against what? &quot;Unreasonable search and seizure.&quot;To be secure against unreasonable search of what? &quot;In their persons, houses, papers, and effects.&quot; That&#039;s fairly well defined.What defines the reasonability of a search? All following the comma after &quot;shall not be violated.&quot;&quot;Shall not be violated&quot; similarly leaves no wiggle room for exceptions in which one&#039;s right to be secure may be violated. Crucially, those exceptions must be satisfied in the Fourth Amendment itself to establish reasonablility of the search.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tweetr, post: 3944695, member: 5183"] Well, actually you are misstating both those rights. We must accurately state them before we can evaluate absoluteness. Yes, I am referring in this context to our Consitutional rights. The Second Amendment right, stated in its essence, is to keep and bear arms. The protection given is "shall not be violated." The weapons you posit are not limited in the Second Amendment, which only specifies "arms." It does not in any way limit "arms." It does in the nominative absolute clause give more information that the "arms" in view are in fact military ("militia") arms. In that sense the nature of the "arms" is [B][I]not[/I][/B] limited as you posit. The First Amendment right, stated in its essence, is "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech." The right is freedom of speech, while the protection is "Congress shall make no law." The prohibition against making law is in fact absolute with respect to abridging the freedom of speech. "No law" leaves no room for exception, Holmes' absurd reasoning in Schenk notwithstanding. Which brings us to the subject of this thread, the Fourth Amendment. Stated in its essence the right guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment is the right to be secure. The protection is "shall not be violated." For further understanding just fill in the blanks. Whose right to be secure? "Of the people". That's easy enough. You are a person, I am a person, we are "the people." To be secure against what? "Unreasonable search and seizure." To be secure against unreasonable search of what? "In their persons, houses, papers, and effects." That's fairly well defined. What defines the reasonability of a search? All following the comma after "shall not be violated." "Shall not be violated" similarly leaves no wiggle room for exceptions in which one's right to be secure [B][I]may be [/I][/B]violated. Crucially, those exceptions must be satisfied in the Fourth Amendment itself to establish reasonablility of the search. [/QUOTE]

Verification