Skip to main content

View Diary: The Second versus the Fourth (27 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Well the 4th has built in (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    johnny wurster

    limitations on the right. The 2nd (post Heller v. DC) doesn't.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    Says right there that this "right" isn't absolute, vice:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    And since the Supremes have told us that the Milita stuff is just fluff, the right is absolute (or just about).

    So the 2nd crowd does have a leg to stand on (not that I agree) that it is "more fundamental" than the 4th.

    •  what do you mean by fundamental? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      judyms9, theatre goon, FrankRose

      There are no fundamental rights except to be left alone, which covers both the fourth and second amendments.

      What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

      by happymisanthropy on Tue Jun 11, 2013 at 02:41:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Our rights as explicated in the BOR (0+ / 0-)

        seem to have a couple of flavors, fundamental (my word) ones  that have no dependent clause in the definition: 1st, 2nd (as interpreted by the Supremes), second clause of the 5th, 6th, 8th that just say what the right is. the 3rd, 4th and 7th contain clauses that define when the right can be infringed.

        (9 & 10 are catchalls)

    •  The Supremes (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      trumpeter, judyms9 change their minds once in awhile. I agree that that's where we are now but maybe, just maybe, their views will change.

      More to the point, I feel it's important to follow what is right, not what SCOTUS says is legal. Right is more of a moral thing within the soul of each of us.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site