LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #10   Report Post  
Old September 5th 10, 08:11 PM posted to rec.radio.shortwave
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,027
Default SPECIAL: Constitution intentionally vague

On Sep 5, 6:34*am, dave wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:
On Sep 4, 7:12 pm, John *wrote:
On 9/3/2010 8:34 PM, dave wrote:


We're supposed to interpret it the way we see fit. *Meanings change over
time.


Yes, you are. *But the rest of us with sane mind, and not residing in
mental institutions, will handle it for you and make sure the true
intent of the forefathers, and the will of the majority of the people,
are carried out.


But this is not what the Constitution says.


What was an "unreasonable" search in 1787? *If a police officer hears
you do a drug deal on a scanner is that admissible in court?


Only if he can prove that a material exchange occurred. Otherwise, it
is pure hearsay and rumor.


 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The NEW Constitution preamble V2.0 Igor Shortwave 0 January 29th 10 12:17 AM
Why Is Steve Robeson Intentionally Mistruthful and Deceitful? bb Policy 21 March 15th 05 02:09 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017