No 2nd Amendment Right for Illegals

[jon-nyc]

So you’d be against it. But that’s not what I asked. Would it be constitutional? If not, why not?

[Horace]

A constitutional amendment to prohibit such state laws would be a slam dunk pass, so of what value is this question? If there exists a constitutional loophole that allows states to pass laws that violate 99.9% of the citizenry's basic understanding of morality and humanity, then there exist processes to close those loopholes.

Owning guns is a "right" we already restrict certain citizens from, notably certain criminals. Nobody seems too bent out of shape about that, and it doesn't raise thought experiments about whether states might pass laws to legalize the rape or enslavement of felons.

[jon-nyc]

Jolly is perfectly capable of avoiding his own questions.

[Jolly]

Not avoiding. You just aren't getting the answer you want.

[jon-nyc]

You mean the answer to my question?

[Renauda]

I doubt very much that I, as a foreign citizen and non resident of the US, can walk into a Wal-Mart or gun shop in most, if not all, US states and jurisdictions and buy a firearm.

[Jolly]

I think you know the answer to your question.

[Horace]

@jon-nyc said in No 2nd Amendment Right for Illegals:

Jolly is perfectly capable of avoiding his own questions.

You haven't answered the question either. And, you should know that whether something is "constitutional" is not always cut and dried. The cutting and drying occurs in arguments before the court.

As Jack Smith will attest to, one does not ask permission from the Supreme Court to do something, one just does it, and then allows SCOTUS to provide guidance about what is or is not constitutional. Any conceit you may have that your question has a definitive answer, would have to be justified.

[jon-nyc]

The question had to do with Jolly’s thoughts about what is constitutional or not, not what SCOTUS might say.

[jon-nyc]

@Jolly said in No 2nd Amendment Right for Illegals:

I think you know the answer to your question.

If you don’t think the constitution doesn’t apply to them than it would follow that such laws would be constitutional. I just wanted to see if you’d say it out loud.

[Copper]

@jon-nyc said in No 2nd Amendment Right for Illegals:

Can they be enslaved?

I thought that was the whole point.

[Jolly]

@Copper said in No 2nd Amendment Right for Illegals:

@jon-nyc said in No 2nd Amendment Right for Illegals:

Can they be enslaved?

I thought that was the whole point.

That was his point, as Jon goes for the "gotcha".

IMO, the Constitution and Bill of Rights apply to citizens and legal immigrants. It does not apply to people in the country illegally. Now, Jon will cite precedent, but I think much of that precedent is wrong, especially since much of it was generated when the U.S. did not have millions pouring across the border. Illegal aliens are subject to immigration courts and as such, the Executive has more power in those courts than in the regular court system.

Which brings up another interesting point...The Constitution's 13th Amendment still allows for involuntary servitude or slavery as punishment for a crime. So yes, since illegals are criminals we can send them to the cane fields against their will.

So, there is the answer that Jon knew when he asked the question.

[Axtremus]

@Jolly wrote:

The Constitution's 13th Amendment still allows for involuntary servitude or slavery as punishment for a crime.

Couple that with "show me the man, and I will show you the crime" and anyone can be enslaved.

[Jolly]

@Axtremus said in No 2nd Amendment Right for Illegals:

@Jolly wrote:

The Constitution's 13th Amendment still allows for involuntary servitude or slavery as punishment for a crime.

Couple that with "show me the man, and I will show you the crime" and anyone can be enslaved.

If you want to go there. Which is a nice reason for a fair justice system.