The Second amendment

Guns don't kill threads; Ratz kill threads!
Post Reply
User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 27519
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

The Second amendment

Post by Tero » Thu Oct 08, 2015 1:18 pm

Topic for all you patriots. Discuss your rights, common law, magna carta, whatever.

If you bring up 2nd Amendment in my "end all guns" topic, I will quote and reply here. Otherwise, I have nothing to say.

Otherwise you can have this as your romper room.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20273
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Hermit » Thu Oct 08, 2015 2:28 pm

Nobody laugh neither, orite? Serious shit be seriouz.


User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 10725
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: philobarbaros
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Sean Hayden » Thu Oct 08, 2015 2:40 pm

:hehe:

-good idea Hermit

shut up

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 61240
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by JimC » Thu Oct 08, 2015 9:32 pm

We all have the right to bare gnus! :lay:

(they're so cute when they're naked... :shifty: )
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Seth » Fri Oct 09, 2015 4:31 am

Tero wrote:Topic for all you patriots. Discuss your rights, common law, magna carta, whatever.

If you bring up 2nd Amendment in my "end all guns" topic, I will quote and reply here. Otherwise, I have nothing to say.

Otherwise you can have this as your romper room.
Fuck off Tero.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 27519
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Tero » Fri Oct 09, 2015 1:12 pm

Gun Nuts TM, have brought up Obama again. Since this is the active thread on the Constitution, the phrase "natural born citizen" is not defined in it:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural ... zen_clause

There is some history etc in there. In the 1700s, there was no technology to determine the father of a child. The Americanness could only be defined by the mother.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Seth » Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:22 pm

Tero wrote:Gun Nuts TM, have brought up Obama again. Since this is the active thread on the Constitution, the phrase "natural born citizen" is not defined in it:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural ... zen_clause

There is some history etc in there. In the 1700s, there was no technology to determine the father of a child. The Americanness could only be defined by the mother.
Correct, the phrase is not defined in the Constitution because at the time the Constitution was adopted it was a phrase of common usage and everybody understood exactly what it meant: it meant that both parents of the candidate had to be citizens of the United States. This was a problem for the first couple of generations of Presidents because at the beginning all of them were British citizens and their parents were British citizens, which is why they inserted the provision, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

This highlighted clause dealt with the obvious problem they faced and made explicit exception for those who were citizens of the United States by virtue of the fact that they were alive when the Constitution was adopted. This part makes it perfectly clear that there are two classes of citizen, "natural born citizen" and "citizen" and that after those who were alive at the time the Constitution was adopted died, no person other than a "natural born citizen" could be President.

This distinction proves absolutely that the intent of the Framers was to exclude persons whose parents were not both citizens of the United States from being eligible for the office of President.

And Barack Obama's parents were not both US citizens. Therefore he is not qualified to hold the office of President.

And I'll post this wherever the fuck I choose to post it.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20273
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Hermit » Sat Oct 10, 2015 12:11 am

A natural born citizen is one who popped out of the womb when mum was on US soil. The constitution would have made the requirement that mother and father would also have to be US citizens explicit just like its authors bothered to insert the grandfather clause. They did not because they had no intention to impose such a requirement. If you were right, Cruz, Jindal and Rubio would have grounds to worry about the legitimacy of running for the US presidency. I think they have nothing to fear even though none of them were offspring of two US citizens at the time they were born, simply because that is not a requirement.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Seth » Sat Oct 10, 2015 2:54 am

Hermit wrote:A natural born citizen is one who popped out of the womb when mum was on US soil.
Nope. That's just a plain old "citizen." Moreover, it's still a "citizen" even if it popped out on some other country's soil so long at one of its parents is a US citizen.

"Natural born" citizens are a different thing.

The constitution would have made the requirement that mother and father would also have to be US citizens explicit just like its authors bothered to insert the grandfather clause.
There is no requirement that the Constitution include a glossary of defined terms. The common rules of statutory construction and interpretation used for thousands of years cover such ambiguities.
They did not because they had no intention to impose such a requirement.
If so, then why is the term "natural born citizen" found in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 at all? And why is that the ONLY place in the Constitution that term is found. One of the rules of statutory interpretation says that no words in a law (in this case the Constitution) are meaningless surplusage. Every word written and ratified means something. So. given that the words "natural born citizen" are indeed found in the Constitution, in the section applying ONLY to qualification to be President, and everywhere else "citizen" is mentioned it does NOT include the qualifier "natural born," what then does "natural born citizen" mean that is DIFFERENT from "citizen?"

If you were right, Cruz, Jindal and Rubio would have grounds to worry about the legitimacy of running for the US presidency.
Er, they do have something to worry about, and neither Jindal, Cruz nor Rubio is qualified to be President.
I think they have nothing to fear even though none of them were offspring of two US citizens at the time they were born, simply because that is not a requirement.
I think they are ignoring the issue just as Obama did, and I disagree that any of them is qualified. But being qualified to be President doesn't prevent someone from running for the office in an election, it just means that they cannot be elected.

What's sauce for the goose is indeed sauce for the gander and I'll be surprised if any of them makes it to the nomination stage, much less winning the election.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20273
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Hermit » Sat Oct 10, 2015 3:02 am

Seth wrote:why is the term "natural born citizen" found in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 at all?
To make a distinction between a person who is a citizen by virtue of being born on US soil and a person like, say, Christopher Hitchens or Rupert Murdoch is a naturalised citizen.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Seth » Sat Oct 10, 2015 6:27 am

Hermit wrote:
Seth wrote:why is the term "natural born citizen" found in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 at all?
To make a distinction between a person who is a citizen by virtue of being born on US soil and a person like, say, Christopher Hitchens or Rupert Murdoch is a naturalised citizen.
Er, that's why they have the terms "natural born citizen" and "citizen." The point being that once "naturalized" the person becomes a "citizen" (not a "naturalized citizen") but can never be a "natural born citizen" because his or her parents are not citizens of the United States.

There is no such thing as a separate sub class of citizens called "naturalized citizens." Aliens become citizens by being "naturalized," and then they are citizens, but they are not "natural born" citizens and cannot hold the office of President of the United States, which is why Arnold Schwarzenegger cannot be President, but can be Governor of California.

You're either a citizen or your not a citizen and you're either a citizen or a natural born citizen, the distinction being that natural born citizens have parents who are BOTH citizens of the United States. And it doesn't matter how they came to be citizens, whether born as citizens or naturalized, so long as they are citizens when you are born, you are a natural born citizen and eligible to hold the office of President.

If one of them was not a citizen at the time of your birth, you are not a natural born citizen and cannot lawfully hold that office.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 20273
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Hermit » Sat Oct 10, 2015 8:13 am

Seth wrote:Aliens become citizens by being "naturalized," and then they are citizens, but they are not Aliens become citizens by being "naturalized," and then they are citizens, but they are not "natural born" citizens and cannot hold the office of President of the United States citizens
And that is exactly why the US Constitution uses the the expression "natural born" rather than "naturalised". The former is a US citizen by birth right, the latter by governmet approval.

You have yet to furnish evidence that if a person is born when one of the parents is not a US citizen at the time, that person is not legally entitled to be classed as a natural born citizen, and I doubt you could do that even if you tried.

User avatar
NineBerry
Tame Wolf
Posts: 4792
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 1:35 pm
Location: nSk
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by NineBerry » Sat Oct 10, 2015 10:03 am

Who is going to spread the bad news that Jesus will never be elligible to become President?

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 27519
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Tero » Sat Oct 10, 2015 12:17 pm

Have to agree with Seth: Cruz is not eligible. Other than that, disagree. The children (born on US soil) of immigrants residing in US permanently were not to be denied rights including presidency. The parents, obviously, were.
Last edited by Tero on Sat Oct 10, 2015 12:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 27519
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: Something something birds
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: The Second amendment

Post by Tero » Sat Oct 10, 2015 12:21 pm

For the presidency, Cruz can be defined as mostly Canadian till 2005 or even 2013
In August 2013, after the Dallas Morning News pointed out that Cruz had dual Canadian-American citizenship,[33] he applied to formally renounce his Canadian citizenship and ceased being a citizen of Canada on May 14, 2014.[32][34]
Wiki

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest