Supreme Court to rule on whether the 14th amendment incorporates the 2nd

[Lettow77]

 Hoping they rule in favour of states having the right to ban firearms.

[Caliga]

Hoping they rule in favour of states having the right to ban firearms.

STAYTS RAHTS. 

[Fate]

Hoping they rule in favour of states having the right to ban firearms.

WHITE RAHTS. 

[jimmy olsen]

Hoping they rule in favour of states having the right to ban firearms.

STAYTS RAHTS. 

I was surprised by Lettow's consistency there.

[Lettow77]

 States should have the right to pursue their own destiny. This naturally includes northern states that have in mind policies I do not agree with. I just wish each was left to their respective autonomy.

[DontSayBanana]

States have the right to pursue their own destiny. This naturally includes northern states that have in mind policies I do not agree with. I just wish each was left to their respective autonomy.

Wow.  That argument hasn't held water since we did away with the Articles of Confederation in 1800.

That said, I hope this doesn't neuter the states further than it has to; my personal take is that the 2nd only affirms the collective right to a military.  Also, if the phrase "bear arms" doesn't refer to participating in military service, it'd probably have to be the first and only time I've ever seen that phrase used in that way.

[jimmy olsen]

States have the right to pursue their own destiny. This naturally includes northern states that have in mind policies I do not agree with. I just wish each was left to their respective autonomy.

Wow.  That argument hasn't held water since we did away with the Articles of Confederation in 1800.

1789

[Lettow77]

 I think your judgement would be of considerable suprise to people like Calhoun, banana. You are overly quick to credit the demise of the state as an independent political entity if you do so before the 1860's.

[Neil]

I think your judgement would be of considerable suprise to people like Calhoun, banana. You are overly quick to credit the demise of the state as an independent political entity if you do so before the 1860's.

Nevertheless, there has been some serious interconnectedness since the creation of the US.  Look at the way that the South dragged the North into the War of 1812, back when the South was more powerful.  That was certainly interfering with the destiny of those states.

[grumbler]

I think your judgement would be of considerable suprise to people like Calhoun, banana. You are overly quick to credit the demise of the state as an independent political entity if you do so before the 1860's.

No, I think Calhoun would be astonished to find people talking about states having "their own destiny" in 2010.  You are overly quick to assume that historical characters agree with your fuzzy concepts of states existing as other than governmental administrative groupings in the minds of the US (or even Southern US) populace.  States were more significant in Calhoun's day than today, but the point of creating the US from the Confederation was to link their "destinies."