Would that decision null and void the required 4473?We the people of the United states.
I think the judge didn't read it. She's opening the door for anyone to cross the border and take up arms.
Would that decision null and void the required 4473?We the people of the United states.
I think the judge didn't read it. She's opening the door for anyone to cross the border and take up arms.
An Obama appointed judge that grants Illegal people have guns? Would there be the same decision for citizens? Something doesn't smell right about this decision to me.This is your Obama appointed judge. Read the room.
Constitutional rights have never been reserved for citizens only.Of course not, but he's not a citizen therefore constitutional rights don't or at least shouldn't apply.
Heller addressed militia in the second amendment as the body of ordinary citizens capable of taking up arms to defend the nation.Constitutional rights have never been reserved for citizens only.
Eventually, the Supreme Court extended these constitutional protections to all aliens within the United States, including those who entered unlawfully, declaring that aliens who have once passed through our gates, even illegally, may be expelled only after proceedings conforming to traditional standards of fairness encompassed in due process of law.3 The Court reasoned that aliens physically present in the United States, regardless of their legal status, are recognized as persons guaranteed due process of law by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.4 Thus, the Court determined, [e]ven one whose presence in this country is unlawful, involuntary, or transitory is entitled to that constitutional protection.5 Accordingly, notwithstanding Congress’s indisputably broad power to regulate immigration, fundamental due process requirements notably constrained that power with respect to aliens within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.6
Hopefully they are issued a blue helmet to make it clear whom is the enemy.Ain't it just great...lmao.The government's going to arm them.Even better yet there's a court decision that's going to arm felon's. What's next?
Taking your thoughts at face value, why would anyone become a citizen if you're entitled to the same rights as a non citizen? I understand libertarians don't ascribe much value to borders, but this is outright ridiculous. Without some meaningful distinction, what you're arguing for is a globalist wet dream where nobody belongs anywhere and the corporations win slave labor from anywhere. Sound crazy? Tyson, the chicken people, just fired huge numbers of Americans and are actively recruiting illegals from New York at lower pay with massive benefits. They stated they are actively seeking more illegals to hire preferentially. This is what happens when there is no distinction and just a small example of the ruin that will come from it.I've discussed this before with a friend and I believe on here.
Set the legal/illegal question aside, I believe EVERYONE on United States soil has the same rights, even alleged criminals.
If someone is visiting here legally but overstays their VISA then they are operating out of the bounds of the law. However, as they are HERE then if they are accused of a crime they are allowed to hire an attorney, mount a defense, etc. Otherwise we could just shoot them in the head and dump t heir body somewhere legal as they have no rights. Now that's just silly, but that would be a logical conclusion of the position of non-citizens not having Constitutionally guaranteed rights.
Consider also that a person here illegally still has a right to free speech. They can write a letter to an editor complaining about the system and the predicament they are in. They can write a letter to the Senator of the state they are residing in telling him/her about the unfairness of their current position.
Consider an illegal immigrant who is a pregnant female. She decides to kill her unborn child at eight (8) monthes. What argument is there to prosecute her for violating her unborn child's rights? The child hasn't been born yet, ergo not an American citizen. As it isn't yet an American citizen it doesn't have rights, or would someone argue otherwise?
I could go on and on for what we could do to a person who is here illegally IF they don't have rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution. In my opinion it is better to be far more liberal in the interpretation of rights than narrow. The more narrow(ly?) we define rights the worse it is for all of us.
Regards,
Doug
No…. Citizens are hear legally, hell even citizens of other countries are fine. If you break the law to get here then none of our rights should apply to you. Not sure if that’s how it is but that is how I think it should be.Constitutional rights have never been reserved for citizens only.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."Of course not, but he's not a citizen therefore constitutional rights don't or at least shouldn't apply.
Actually..."We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
I've seen it said on INGO that the right to bear arms and self-defense is God-given. If that is true, it cannot apply only to US citizens. If it is not true, then you must believe that the Constitution grants you the right as a citizen, instead of protecting a pre-existing right given by God to all people.
Rights only for white people? Wow, ok. Haven't seen that on INGO for a while.Actually...
View attachment 340997
I wasn't saying it was right, I wasn't even saying this was my view. What an intellectually dishonest display of mental midgetry.Rights only for white people? Wow, ok. Haven't seen that on INGO for a while.
Is the right to bear arms God-given or not?
Except for voting and holding certain offices, where does the Constitution deny rights to non-citizens?How screwed up is it ? The government has no problem taking property and Constitutional freedoms from Law Abiding CITIZENS, but stands up and gives property and rights to NON citizens who are in this country illegally.
Seems like people who do that should be immediately stripped of all power and replaced with people who are smart enough to read the Constitution