HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Originalism is a scam. Bu...

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 11:35 AM

Originalism is a scam. But we all knew that.


?s=21&t=yZgg04Ydh9KyUOh67Ugspg

Thomas declares: "the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home" - there is ZERO textual support for that. Ex. 9999 why "originalism" is a scam

10 replies, 751 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 10 replies Author Time Post
Reply Originalism is a scam. But we all knew that. (Original post)
JoanofArgh Jun 2022 OP
Irish_Dem Jun 2022 #1
spooky3 Jun 2022 #2
d_b Jun 2022 #3
Model35mech Jun 2022 #4
Jerry2144 Jun 2022 #6
Model35mech Jun 2022 #10
LastDemocratInSC Jun 2022 #5
Sanity Claws Jun 2022 #7
nuxvomica Jun 2022 #8
RANDYWILDMAN Jun 2022 #9

Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 11:36 AM

1. The GOP just makes it up as the go. All of it is pure BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 11:47 AM

2. Jennifer Rubin has been fantastic since she saw the light with Trump. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 11:49 AM

3. Of course it is

“The constitution doesn’t say you can”

“The constitution doesn’t say you can’t”

Pack the fucking court already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 11:54 AM

4. What was originallky meant to be the opponent of the well regulated militia?

A home invader?

A mugger?

A Gang member?

Liberal Democrats??????????????

I don't think so.

More likely, it was coordinated assaults on territory and communities of Americans by British, French, Spanish and Indigenous attacks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Model35mech (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 12:04 PM

6. Its original intent

was to protect against an uprising of the slaves, similar to what occurred in Haiti (I think) around 1791 (history's not my strongest suit) and to protect against a Native American threat that never really was. Since the founders didn't want a standing army, they wanted states to provide militias. And the slave states wanted armed people to be ready to put down any revolt by the enslaved people so they pushed harder for this and the language "...being necessary to the security of a free State..." . It was intended for slave owners. The second really is based in racism.

You can see this with all the Stand Your Ground laws that really only apply when used against Scary Black People(TM) and the police brutality towards all minorities.

This should have been revised when we passed the 14-16th

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jerry2144 (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 12:46 PM

10. Yes. The incipient American states wanted protection from attackers

We may argue about WHICH attackers were on the minds of the Founders.

But SURE AS HELL the militia (a -group- of armed militants who quite honestly would take much more than a minute to organize) was not intended to primarily: protect people from assaults on the street or in their homes, or to protect against home invasion by criminals (although attacks by national opponents, well, maybe), or to stop Political Activists from attacking homes of Gov't officials, or to protect against Gangs that are trying to take control of local government to promote their franchise in the drug trade, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 11:55 AM

5. There's a legal doctrine that supports "originalism"

known by the Latin words "Fac eam introeuntibus vobis".

That translates to "Make it up as you go".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 12:18 PM

7. Handguns did not exist when the 2nd A was written

How can that be included in originalism? 2nd A must be limited to muskets.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 12:24 PM

8. And yet Alito's leaked opinion could find no right to privacy

Even though it's implicit in at least the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 9th, 13th, and 14th amendments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoanofArgh (Original post)

Thu Jun 23, 2022, 12:30 PM

9. Thomas a non original citizen and phoney barrett a non judge,

how people who were clearly excluded from 1776 original united states, originalism is a convenient strategy, with no depth of thought to it at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread