 |
|
As has been explained to you by other posters in this thread
Posted on: January 9, 2020 at 16:21:10 CT
ummmm MU
Posts:
44902
Member For:
13.50 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
0
and the other one below, you're asking different questions now.
But here you go:
Now read carefully, the question is not whether murder happens...it is whether every resident of the united states should be allowed to disregard the law and murder someone if he chooses to do so.
Residents can disregard any laws they want. It may not be advisable given how oppressive the govt can be at times, but adhering or disregarding a law is up to the residents.
However, we were originally talking about the Constitution and whether residents could interpret its meaning and disregard it. Of course, residents can interpret the meaning of the Constitution; it's a very easy task to do. Also, there are almost no prohibitions against individual behavior in the Constitution. The Constitution mostly includes prohibitions on certain actions by the federal government, and some prohibitions on certain actions by the states. Otherwise, the 9th and 10th Amendment tell the story.
Should there be consequences for murder if the killer has decided that the law against murder is unconstitutional and he doesn't choose to be bound by it.
Of course. Murder is a violation of the natural law. Also, state laws against murder are not unconstitutional (inherently). See 10th Amendment.
Be careful, it is not whether it happens, the question is whether it should be permitted to happen.
Permitted by whom? This wasn't the question from earlier today, and it wasn't even the question from your strawman in the post below. You need to slow down, reread, and think before your fire off these diatribes.
Edited by ummmm at 16:23:03 on 01/09/20
But here you go:
Now read carefully, the question is not whether murder happens...it is whether every resident of the united states should be allowed to disregard the law and murder someone if he chooses to do so.
Residents can disregard any laws they want. It may not be advisable given how oppressive the govt can be at times, but adhering or disregarding a law is up to the residents.
However, we were originally talking about the Constitution and whether residents could interpret its meaning and disregard it. Of course, residents can interpret the meaning of the Constitution; it's a very easy task to do. Also, there are almost no prohibitions against individual behavior in the Constitution. The Constitution mostly includes prohibitions on certain actions by the federal government, and some prohibitions on certain actions by the states. Otherwise, the 9th and 10th Amendment tell the story.
Should there be consequences for murder if the killer has decided that the law against murder is unconstitutional and he doesn't choose to be bound by it.
Of course. Murder is a violation of the natural law. Also, state laws against murder are not unconstitutional (inherently). See 10th Amendment.
Be careful, it is not whether it happens, the question is whether it should be permitted to happen.
Permitted by whom? This wasn't the question from earlier today, and it wasn't even the question from your strawman in the post below. You need to slow down, reread, and think before your fire off these diatribes.
Edited by ummmm at 16:23:03 on 01/09/20
Please explain why this message is being reported.
MESSAGE THREAD
As has been explained to you by other posters in this thread - ummmm MU - 1/9 16:21:10
-