Guns, Guns Guns

While a senior bureaucrat (boo, hiss), I actually was seconded on a number of times to write legislation, that was later passed by our Parliament (Congress). Never got to write up constitutional stuff for a referendum.
Certainly you can't get the current government to pass a law wih a clause saying later governments can't modify or abolish it.
You could write up a referendum question, that if passed by the electorate would bind future governments.

Incidentally the discussions here describing Hilliary as a far left socialist or communist, are quite funny when viewed from another developed country. Probably corrupt, certainly a professionsl career politician beholden to the party machine, but by any normal standard quite to the right, just not as much as some others there.

Nothing in the second trumps article V, ergo amendments using the article V methods can amend the second.
If a government wants to make a law unamendable, they tend to throw them in free trade agreements.

Tensh, you really should leave enough of the quote so we can identify what quote you are responding too. Even the first couple of words will do.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

gcomeau wrote:
No it can't, and no it doesn't...And NOBODY has that power in the United States. Not the Founders and not anybody else. The very idea that they do is absurd. You would be laughed out of any courtroom in the country for even suggesting it.
Law that can't be repealed? No. Such. Thing.

And here you contradict yourself. You stated before that "the people" can make up and pass "any" law they want to, yet now your saying they can't? make up your mind. Can they or cant they? The law specifically states that Congress cannot make a law for the purpose of infringing on the right of the people to keep and bare arms. Any bill passed to specifically repeal the 2nd amendment is a law with the specific purpose of infringing on the RIGHT of the people to keep and bare arms. there is NO other reason for it, therefore it is not legally passible by Congress. Conversely, a law that repeals the entire Bill-of-Rights could be argued not to be for the specific purpose of infringing on the right of the people to keep and bare arms and thus would be legal to pass, which is what the left wing, anti-American socialist nutters want anyway, regardless of what some left wing socialist propagandist my post here.

gcomeau wrote:

MAD-4A wrote:you mean "enforcing tax ales" that aren't enforced on other organizations, such as ACORN or the (so-called) ACLU? hmmm why weren't they effected? maybe because they are ultra left wing socialists?

I sincerely have no idea what you're even talking about here or what point you think you're making.

Then I guess you don't have the whole story.

gcomeau wrote:

MAD-4A wrote:Do you even know how laws are made? You seem to think that "the citizens" make up some "law" and poof there it is. Amendments are made by ... uhmm ... who ??? that would be Congress. THEY make up a "Bill", then THEY pass it and THEN it gets ratified by the states and becomes an Amendment. "the citizens" have nothing to do with it.

Oh? Who does Congress work for?
Oops, guess the citizens have everything to do with it don't they?

Nope, that's what they claim, oh, perhaps a few (newbees) are genuinely there for "the people", but most are politicians who work for themselves & their own political power, doling out lies and whatever they have to keep the masses placated, while lining their own pockets.

PeterZ wrote:Gadzooks! Must I use emoticons?!? I hate the boogers! I was being sarcastic, MAD-4A.

oh, didn't catch the sarcasm

gcomeau wrote:...

you can keep dragging the origin of your reference point as far over to the left as you want and claim it's the middle, but it doesn't make it so.

PeterZ wrote:Amendments are proposed by either congress or a Constitutional convention. They are ratified by 3/4ths of the state legislatures or 3/4 of the state at the convention. Congress CANNOT propose and ratify Amendments to the Constitution. No law it passes can supersede the Constitution. All it can do is propose Amendments for the States' legislatures to ratify or reject. Congress cannot Amend the Constitution. Period. That authority resides in the States and the people.

Congress has to pass the proposal (bill) first, then the States vote to ratify.

MAD-4A wrote:And here you contradict yourself. You stated before that "the people" can make up and pass "any" law they want to, yet now your saying they can't? make up your mind. Can they or cant they? The law specifically states that Congress cannot make a law for the purpose of infringing on the right of the people to keep and bare arms. Any bill passed to specifically repeal the 2nd amendment is a law with the specific purpose of infringing on the RIGHT of the people to keep and bare arms. there is NO other reason for it, therefore it is not legally passible by Congress. Conversely, a law that repeals the entire Bill-of-Rights could be argued not to be for the specific purpose of infringing on the right of the people to keep and bare arms and thus would be legal to pass, which is what the left wing, anti-American socialist nutters want anyway, regardless of what some left wing socialist propagandist my post here.

I wonder, do you have anything to support your arguments? Writing by constitutional scholars, SCOTUS members or something similar authoritative? Or are you pulling these interpretations out of thin air?

MAD-4A wrote:

gcomeau wrote:
No it can't, and no it doesn't...And NOBODY has that power in the United States. Not the Founders and not anybody else. The very idea that they do is absurd. You would be laughed out of any courtroom in the country for even suggesting it.
Law that can't be repealed? No. Such. Thing.

And here you contradict yourself. You stated before that "the people" can make up and pass "any" law they want to, yet now your saying they can't? make up your mind. Can they or cant they?

I'm not contradicting anything, you just don't understand what you're talking about.

Yes, the people can pass any law they want, but that doesn't mean it can DO anything they want. They can pass a law to turn off the sun for an hour in the middle of the day every day so they can have a better nap, but it ain't going to happen.

And they can pass a law that says it can't be repealed (which the 2nd does NOT say), but it still damn well can be repealed because there is no way to stop it from being repealed. There are only ways to make it easier or harder. At the end of the day if the citizenry decides they no longer want to live under the rules that an electorate put in place 10 or 20 or 50 or 100 years ago there is no way to prevent them from changing those rules.

And the Founders would be, to be clear, fucking horrified at the idea that the citizens of the nation were not allowed to change any part of the Constitution they felt like changing. They would look at you like you were insane for suggesting it. FFS Jefferson thought the ENTIRE CONSTITUTION should be scrapped and rewritten once a generation so that the views and values of a previous generation would not be forced upon the next one. The idea that any part of that document forbids its own alteration is ludicrous.

MAD-4A wrote:

gcomeau wrote:...

you can keep dragging the origin of your reference point as far over to the left as you want and claim it's the middle, but it doesn't make it so.

Since "..." doesn't tell me what you're replying to I have no idea how to respond to this. Seriously why bother with a quote only to delete the *entire* text contained within said quote and replace it with an elipsis?