Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
PawPaw x 3
Joined
·
8,761 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)

·
Proud GCO member.
Joined
·
7,960 Posts
US Constitution, 14th amendment

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


The language makes a very clear distinction between citizens and persons.

"It does not follow, because aliens are not parties to the Constitution, as citizens are parties to it, that whilst they actually conform to it, they have no right to its protection. Aliens are not more parties to the laws, than they are parties to the Constitution; yet it will not be disputed, that as they owe, on one hand, a temporary obedience, they are entitled, in return, to their protection and advantage"
-- James Madison, January 7. 1800
 

·
PawPaw x 3
Joined
·
8,761 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
US Constitution, 14th amendment

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


The language makes a very clear distinction between citizens and persons.
that whilst they actually conform to it, t
Yeap. Old James got that one wrong. Here illegally no right to the very Constitution to which you thumbed your nose. Illegals aren't actually conforming to our laws are they?
 

·
Proud GCO member.
Joined
·
7,960 Posts
Yeap. Old James got that one wrong. Here illegally no right to the very Constitution to which you thumbed your nose. Illegals aren't actually conforming to our laws are they?
Impressive. That is an amazing amount of ignorance crammed into a relatively small number of words.

I'll let the father of the Constitution know you understand it better than he does. I'm sure he'll find it amusing.
 

·
PawPaw x 3
Joined
·
8,761 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
AtlPhilip;2894021 I'll let the father of the Constitution know you understand it better than he does.[/QUOTE said:
So you gonna have a conversation with him? Impressive. Not only do you show your immaturity with your response, you also give indication that you might be a little unstable if you think you'll be talking to him.

Now, back on the subject. I am sure Mr Madison was not talking about someone who broke laws to get into the country when he penned that statement. He could not have as a matter of fact because the laws were not even on the books then is my understanding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,956 Posts
us constitution, 14th amendment

no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the united states;
nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.


the language makes a very clear distinction between citizens and persons.
Aren't you ignoring the first sentence?

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,213 Posts
"equal protection under law" is absolutely not the same as "rights and privileges of citizenship". One of my rights as citizen is to vote. Spare me the "that's not in the US Constitution" crap, all my rights aren't explicitly enumerated in that one document. I can be deprived of that right via due process. Clearly, non-citizens don't get to vote either. So there is clear precedent for acknowledging rights and granting privileges to different categories of people.

Another example: You may not murder someone. That is a blanket protection under law. Doesn't matter whether the person is here legally or not. Equal protection for all.

Just because a crime is immediately successful (crossing the border / walking out of the bank with a sack of money) doesn't mean you immediately obtain extra rights (presumption of legal status / presumption that the money is yours).
 

·
Proud GCO member.
Joined
·
7,960 Posts
Aren't you ignoring the first sentence
No. Those are a consecutive series of OR/NOR clauses. The first refers to "citizens", the latter two to "persons".

Madison addresses it directly in the next paragraph of the document I linked. Read the last phrase carefully. Not only does Madison state they have Constitutional rights, he flatly states that they even have a right to be tried by a jury that consists of 50% aliens.

"If aliens had no rights under the constitution, they might not only be banished, but even capitally punished, without a jury or the other incidents to a fair trial. But so far has a contrary principle been carried, in every part of the United States, that except on charges of treason, an alien has, besides all the common privileges, the special one of being tried by a jury, of which one half may be also aliens."

So you gonna have a conversation with him? Impressive. Not only do you show your immaturity with your response, you also give indication that you might be a little unstable if you think you'll be talking to him.
Blather, sarcasm, and ad hominem do not warrant the time to write a mature, intelligent response. Improve the quality of your comments and you will find that the quality of the responses improves accordingly.

I am sure Mr Madison was not talking about someone who broke laws to get into the country when he penned that statement. He could not have as a matter of fact because the laws were not even on the books then is my understanding.
Your understanding is woefully lacking. Madison was specifically addressing the Alien and Sedition Acts signed into law by President Adams in 1798, two years before the linked manuscript was written.

One of my rights as citizen is to vote. Spare me the "that's not in the US Constitution" crap, all my rights aren't explicitly enumerated in that one document.
You have no constitutional right to vote. If you did there would be no need for the 15th, 19th and 26th amendments.

I can be deprived of that right via due process. Clearly, non-citizens don't get to vote either. So there is clear precedent for acknowledging rights and granting privileges to different categories of people.
Your rights are inalienable and granted to you by your creator. They are only protected by the Constitution. Privileges, such as voting, are granted by the state and you may be denied them arbitrarily.

Another example: You may not murder someone. That is a blanket protection under law. Doesn't matter whether the person is here legally or not. Equal protection for all.
Laws prohibiting homicide are not a "protection under the law" for the victim they are a prohibition and penalty for the actor.

Just because a crime is immediately successful (crossing the border / walking out of the bank with a sack of money) doesn't mean you immediately obtain extra rights (presumption of legal status / presumption that the money is yours).
I'm not sure I understand your statement here. No one is getting "extra" rights. Your inalienable rights exist because you exist. The Constitution merely states that the United States will act to protect those rights for all who fall under it's jurisdiction. And aliens on US soil absolutely fall under the jurisdiction of the US.
 

·
PawPaw x 3
Joined
·
8,761 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
sarcasm, and ad hominem do not warrant the time to write a mature, intelligent response. Improve the quality of your comments and you will find that the quality of the responses improves accordingly.

Your understanding is woefully lacking. Madison was specifically addressing the Alien and Sedition Acts signed into law by President Adams in 1798, two years before the linked manuscript was written.

.
No sir. Your understanding is woefully lacking. Again, he was speaking of aliens who arrived here legally according to the laws of the land. He was not referring to illegal aliens Did your conversation with him as you suggest you have not reveal that?
Your definition of blather and sarcasm is apparently different than mine. You are simply not even close to being worth enough to me for me to try and get you to communicate like a mature person.

I do not agree with those who block someone after a small exchange without giving the person the last word. I will give you that and then I will block you. Thanks for the insight into your mental state.
 

·
Proud GCO member.
Joined
·
7,960 Posts
no sir. Your understanding is woefully lacking. Again, he was speaking of aliens who arrived here legally according to the laws of the land. He was not referring to illegal aliens did your conversation with him as you suggest you have not reveal that?
Your definition of blather and sarcasm is apparently different than mine. You are simply not even close to being worth enough to me for me to try and get you to communicate like a mature person.

I do not agree with those who block someone after a small exchange without giving the person the last word. I will give you that and then i will block you. Thanks for the insight into your mental state.
q.e.d.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top