Skip to main content

View Diary: Riding a populist wave toward 2014 (224 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  they don't possess it (0+ / 0-)

    Under the Constitution, that particular liberty is not unconditionally possessed by Americans; it is subject to Congress' power to regulate.  Therefore by the dictionary definition of "their", it' s not their liberty and hence it' s not being taken away.

    Your logic is dangerous. It is the same reasoning evil Republicans use to say that forcing insurance companies to insure people with pre- existing conditions or forcing pharmacists to sell contraceptives is an infringement of "our liberties".

    In America Congress has been delegated powers to regulate, and exercising these powers is not an infringement of the liberties of Americans.

    If you want to make a specific argument peculiar to restrictions on weapons, make it, but it is invalid to say any ban on anything is an attack on liberty which should be overturned at the polls.

    •  It is currently possessed. Hence, it is a (0+ / 0-)

      'liberty' by the very definition of the word.

      The courts have upheld warrantless wiretaps, do you find that to not be an infringement on liberty as well?

      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

      by FrankRose on Thu Jan 17, 2013 at 04:57:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  it is only conditionally possessed (0+ / 0-)

        subject to congress.

        otherwise any law that restricts something currently not restricted would be a taking of our liberties by your definition.

        Warrantless wiretapping is an actual violation of liberty, since the 4th amendment defines a right.  There is no analogous right to unlimited magazines.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site