View Single Post
Old April 14, 2013, 09:42 PM   #68
Charles Mosteller
Junior Member
Join Date: April 13, 2013
Posts: 10
Originally Posted by rajbcpa
Where in the 2nd Amendment does it say our rights are limited to reasonable restrictions?
No where in the Second Amendment does it say that our rights are limited to reasonable restrictions. Conversely, where does the Second Amendment say that they are not? Again, it doesn't. It doesn't say that the right to keep and bear arms is either limited or unlimited. But, the same thing could be said about what the Constitution says about many rights.

The Constitution (as well as its amendments) enjoy the status of supreme law of the land. But, that said, they are not the only things that hold that status. But, if a statute and a constitutional provision conflicts, the Constitution takes precedence.

The Constitution serves as the foundation of our nation's legal system. The sovereign of our nation is We, the People. The Constitution, though supreme law of the land, is not superior to the sovereign, itself. Thus, the Constitution that is supreme law of the land can be amended (or even repealed, if desired), as long as the process laid out by the sovereign is followed.

The sovereign reposed the judicial power in our judiciary. The judicial power could be reclaimed, certainly, but until such time as that occurs, it remains where it was reposed.

Our system of law is not handicapped by being limited to just and only the Constitution. Over the course of a couple of hundreds years or more, a great body of law has come into existence - American law, if you will.

Interpretation of the law - and of the Constitution - is common to many nations. It is a typical function of judiciaries.

Back in 1803, there was a case called Marbury v. Madison, and one of the things said in that Supreme Court opinion handed down was the following:

It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.

Marbury v. Madison
Date: 1803

So, with the passage of time, the judiciary has repeatedly interpreted the law. One by product of this is that even fundamental rights, rights that are constitutionally protected, have been interpreted by those in whom the judicial power has been entrusted to mean that they are subject to regulation. We have a constitutional republic, a compound republic, in fact, and we also have a constitutional system of ordered liberty. Not a constitutional system of absolute liberty, but again, one of ordered liberty.
Charles Mosteller is offline  
Page generated in 0.05311 seconds with 7 queries