RSS
The Constitution (always a capital C) is the supreme law of the land. Soldiers and statesmen take their oaths to it; some Americans even used to carry copies of it around in their pockets. The Constitution is the oldest written framework of government in the world still in operation — if it were still in operation.
The United States Supreme Court ruled in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) that there is a right for an individual to bear arms, but the Hawaii Supreme Court recently denied that right. The lack of news about this is remarkable, especially in light of accusations of “treason” against Texas for trying to secure its border. Texas did not defy the Supreme Court but the outcry was much worse.
The Hawaii Supreme Court ruled unanimously that its state constitution provides more “rights” than the federal Constitution. However, the “right” in this case is for the state to impose restrictions on the Second Amendment. The court analyzed the meaning of the state constitution’s language and the history of the Second Amendment, and argued that the Framers meant the right of state militias to repel the federal government. “That’s what they were thinking about long ago,” it said. “Not someone packing a musket to the wigmaker just in case.”
The state court brushed aside the individual right, even though in Heller, the US Supreme Court determined that the Framers had a far more expansive role for “well-regulated militias” than modern gun-rights activists think. If it was supposed to fight off the federal tyranny, it cannot be the National Guard, which is ultimately under federal control.
The Hawaii judges went further and said the original meaning of the Constitution doesn’t matter anyway because history is “not straightforward or fair.” It cites a woman academic who complains that the current Supreme Court “frequently relies [on] moments [in history] in which women and people of color were expressly excluded from political participation and deliberation.” By that standard, much settled law should be overturned. The state court even recycled the idea that because modern weapons are different, the laws should be different. Does that mean protections for free speech and protection against search and seizure should evolve with technology?
After a bizarre tangent about restrictions on abortion, the state supreme court made its critical argument:
As the world turns, it makes no sense for contemporary society to pledge allegiance to the founding era’s culture, realities, laws, and understanding of the Constitution. “The thing about the old days, they the old days.” The Wire: Home Rooms (HBO television broadcast Sept. 24, 2006) (Season Four, Episode Three).
The Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii seems to think that the words of a black heroin dealer on a TV show justify ignoring the Constitution. Perhaps for modern judges, pop culture may be more compelling than stare decisis.
Even though the judges warned they are not historians, they found certain parts of history “useful.” They dismissed the “old days” of the Constitution but invoked “the law of the splintered paddle” from King Kamehameha I (1736? – 1819):
O my people, Honor thy god; Respect alike (the rights of) men great and humble; See to it that our aged, our women, and our children Lie down to sleep by the roadside Without fear of harm. Disobey, and die.
“Kamehameha I’s law protects all people, ‘great and humble’,” says the court. “Especially the vulnerable — children and the elderly. The law imagines free movement without fear. Living without need to carry a deadly weapon for self-defense.” “Honor they god” sounds like mandatory worship, and “disobey, and die” assumes capital punishment. Hawaii abolished the death penalty in 1957, even before it became a state.
After citations from more Hawaiian kings, the non-historians write that “a subversive group” of “schemers, mostly American men,” forced the monarch to sign a new constitution. The establishment of Hawaii was therefore an “unlawful overthrow,” and the state is “ruled by a subjugating nation.” Therefore, the “spirit of Aloha inspires constitutional interpretation.” It “clashes with a federally-mandated lifestyle that lets citizens walk around with deadly weapons during day-to-day activities.”
At a time when media and government claim to fear “subversion” and “insurrection,” why do they not care about a state defying federal rule in the “Spirit of Aloha”? If the US Supreme Court means anything, this ruling would not just be overturned; the judges would be impeached. Instead, the Hawaii Attorney General called it a “landmark decision that affirms the constitutionality of crucial gun-safety legislation.”
Slate called it a “devastating rebuke of the U.S. Supreme Court,” with one journalist saying it was “kind of amazing and historic.” Business Insider quoted The Wire’s writer David Simon, who said the drug dealer character was a “sagacious mother***ker.” The Wire, which portrayed Baltimore as a crime-ridden wasteland of addicts and failing schools, has become liberal scripture. Common Dreams cheered the court’s willingness to dismiss the history of legislation, calling it “time-traveling.”
You should not be angry or surprised when leftists cheer a “progressive” ruling on grounds they would scorn if it went the other way. Instead, let us mock Republicans who think “the Constitution” can save us. It’s a piece of paper. There can never be a pure “government of laws, not men,” because men interpret laws. Still, if law is not to be completely arbitrary, there must be some pretense of final authority. That requires a common language, heritage, identity, and respect for common tradition. At the very least, there must be a good-faith approach to understand law law. Today, the promise of common law has been broken down. Race often perverts justice. District attorneys worry about the “disparate impact” of stopping crime.
A multiracial America had to end this way. There’s no reason to expect non-whites to share our understanding of the law. It is unique to us. Besides, if leftists believe that the United States of America was built on racism and that all our institutions support white privilege, what could be more illegitimate than a constitution drafted by white male slaveholders?
Perhaps some whites will get the message that we are outlaws in the literal sense, deprived of the protection of the system that our ancestors established. There is no reason to live with these people or to respect their authority except at gunpoint. At least in Hawaii, the supreme court has given up pretending it is about anything else.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Given the way Hawaii became part of USistan, don’t whine now.
Seems the shoe’s on the other foot now.
In the Spirit of Aloha, YT, your right to life, liberty, and property is subject to forfeiture in the name of equity. Forget about pursuing happiness too.
HI is an Indian reservation run by the Japanese in service to The Department of Defense. Why it is a state is beyond me.
I like how the Hawaiians are telling white conservatives to suck cock elsewhere.
Hawaii should never have been made an American state. It is not American. Expecting a group of islands filled with Polynesians and Orientals with no historic connection to America or Americans to fit in is absurd. Likewise Puerto Rico should never become a state. It should be given its independence (whether it wants it or not).
The US should declare Aloha to Hawaii and give it independence. It’s a nice place and all that, but it’s mostly Asian and really has nothing in common with the United States. Let the Asians have it and let it either sink on it’s own hard-left politics. They would beg the United States to keep their military presence but Aloha means Aloha.
I kind of like the idea that States stand up to the federal government when the matter is States’ business. If the People of Hawaii don’t like that court’s restrictions on gun rights let the Hawaiians pass some laws dealing with it. Texas of course is doing some good too and hopefully their actions will get some more dominoes falling. Didn’t much of this conflict arise when just one SCOTUS judge basically mandated from on high that the federal constitution had a stranglehold on the States and wasn’t just rules for the feds and if the States didn’t like it that one political appointee essentially told them Tough luck? But that term “non-historians” the writer used a number of times seems to me to be a blind spot case of not being able to see the forest for the trees. The beginning history of the United States as I understand it, before Lincoln raped it, was States handled their business and the federal government took care of the limited role that the States had delegated to it and if the feds got out of hand the States nullified federal overreach.
george w. bush was once reported to have said, the constitution is just a goddamned piece. i’m not here to argue, whether it was written on paper or parchment, it may be the only truth that ever to ever pass through his thin deceitful lips.
covid 19 was not just a darpa bioweapon used to cull useless eaters, it was a direct assault of the on the constitution, targeting the bill of rights in particular, using a “medical exclusion” to all existing civil rights, liberties and guarantees, including the constitution, the geneva conventions and the nuremburg code.
murdering hundreds of millions of people, surprisingly enough was not the primary objective, of this greatest war crime of all time, in fact they were only “collateral damage”, used to provide fear, based stalking horse, as they tracked down their true prey, our few remaining “constitutional rights” (lol), now hunted to extinction, in the name of “public safety”.
well, what did old benjamin franklin say?, early to bed and early to rise….no, no, no, wait a minute….he said:
couldn’t of said it better myself, you old drunken whore monger, god bless you….how i miss the enlightenment, when “it’s all about the benjamin’s”, referred to you.
two beautiful mechanical devices that i would like to see restored to popularity (like analog photography and vinyl recording) are the guillotine and the harmonica (probably not what you think).
Video Link
https://oll.libertyfund.org/quotes/benjamin-franklin-on-the-trade-off-between-essential-liberty-and-temporary-safety-1775
correction: goddamned piece, should read: goddamned piece of paper, my bad (or is it his?).
As other commentators have noted, Hawaii has little or no connection to the other 49 United States or their history. Hawaiians probably should have no right to keep and bear arms, with or without a well-regulated militia. Time to cut Hawaii loose; give it its independence whether it consents or not.
The quotation in the State Court ruling of an Hawaiian King is an indication of the rising power in the Pacific of “indigenous” movements that are now affecting law making and Court rulings for aloha or aroha. All this might be a Trojan horse by corporations and Asian populations, but potent none the less. Australia recently got that noose off its neck but it was a close call.
There are no White conservatives in Hawaii. They are telling Samoans, Chinese, Japanese and liberal Whites to “suck cock”. Their ruling won’t last and the court could even fine and/or have them arrested.
You are making this unnecessarily convoluted.
Having read Heller and not wanting to re-read it at present I’m reasonably confident that the Court pointed out that the original constitution didn’t apply to the states. That’s why they reference the 14th Amendment which incorporated the Bill of Rights and applied them to the states just NOT at the Founding but after the Civil War. The analysis of the second amendment is useful to know the scope of the restraint on the Union before the Civil War so they know how to apply it to states post-Civil War but no conversation of the Bill of Rights as applied to states should proceed without first acknowledging that none of those rights applied to the states until after Lincoln’s invasion.
It’s just the spinning wheel of fortunes, tides of history.
Seeing as old white men mean squat and all that. Why do you even bother to try?
It only gets people angrier at white men and want to dump on them more. Be nice.
These are states and commonwealths for purely geopolitical purposes. Hawaii has no cultural ties to the mainland. That being said, the state cannot overrule the federal.
can you say Pearl Harbor, air bases and USN ?
(vs asian militaritists’ bases, for aspiring hegemons – i.e. Japan 1940s or CCP 2010s/20s?)
fundamental question for all Pacific islets to some degree but the Hawaiian chain geography and location is pretty acute.
This should be applauded and encouraged. Yes, let the left chart their course, and then we will have precedent to chart our own. Bravo. More, more, more.
Hood will call out the Hawaiians but not the Jews who have done the same many times over and in the mainland.
Give Hawaii independence and in five years it will be a Chinese base. It is not self-supporting, it lives off tourism and the US military. Better to send all the Chinese and Japanese back to their ancestral lands and just let the Polynesians stay. Of course under direct US control, but that’s how it goes for primitive peoples. The place will ours or China’s. Let China have Guam, if the Chamarros want it so, but not Hawaii.
-Discard
So we let the left do their things their way and they’ll have to let us do our things our way? That’s not how it’s been working lately, ya’ know.
-Discard
Isn’t the 14th Amendment illegitimate? From what I’ve read about how it “passed” it seems pretty fishy.
The constitution is a white conservative totem. I’d burn it right after drone-striking all the white gun owner’s children in their suburban schools. Clearly Hawaiians have similar contempt for you red state fucks.
You would, would you? But you’re the guy who used to get beat up by girls in high school. Didn’t they hang you by you underwear on a locker? Is your mom really going to let you buy a drone kit? Would you have the forearm strength to operate the hand controls? Come on, you’ve been pushed around your whole life, you wouldn’t stand up to the neighbor whose dog craps on your lawn. You’re what’s known as a sissy. No one is fooled.
The first, and for ages the only, Second Amendment case was Nunn v Georgia, in 1846. That state had enacted a complete ban on handguns nine years earlier (dueling had gotten out of hand) and, as there was no RKBA provision in that state’s constitution, the Supreme Court had to reach for the federal one. They ruled in favor of Mr Nunn and his rights.
However, this was the ruling of the Georgia Supreme Court. (Which had only been established two years earlier, and was a barnstorming show for years. Take a guess in which city it occurred.) It didn’t apply to any other state. Antebellum Dixie had some of the strictest gun laws in the land. Concealed carry was especially discouraged.
Now, I’m all for RKBA– it’s that mean libertarian streak common in Anglo-Saxons– but let’s not fantasize how the legislatures and courts have looked at it all along.
A Brit with a Basque name, a theologian no less, visiting at Emory (in a city that did not exist in 1846) says that Nunn, cited in Heller, was the odd-man-out among court cases of the day:
https://time.com/6331868/supreme-court-second-amendment-history/
He’s written a whole book about it. His point is that individual gun rights violate republican philosophy. So a man with roots in (kind-of-republican) Basque country in monarchical Spain, educated in monarchical Britain, comes to the republic of Georgia to damn a case which underlies a case which affects a case in monarchical Hawai’i.
So Alabamians and Floridians and Texans owe their gun rights to Lincoln? Well, they didn’t even discover them until Reconstruction, when someone else was in power.
However, Article IV, Section 4 requires states to maintain a “republican form of government”. One that doesn’t recognize the right of the common man to self-defense falls arguably somewhat short of that standard.
S&D is in China, and lovin’ it. They use something called “the airplane” over there.
At last, we’ve identified your area of expertise – sucking cock.
This. Puerto Ricans are less restive, and they don’t even speak our language.
Cut Hawaii loose.
I kind of like the idea that States stand up to the federal government when the matter is States’ business.
Strictly speaking, SCOH is correct, but for the wrong reason. The doctrine of incorporation is a fraud. Every state SC should tell SCOTUS to take it’s perverse interpretation of the 14th Amendment and shove it up it’s collective ass.
none of those rights applied to the states until after Lincoln’s invasion.
Yes, well after.
IIRC, it wasn’t until well into the 20th century that the doctrine of incorporation was formulated. It’s a fraud, a fabrication.
Good idea… Hawaii real estate is probably worth just about what’s needed for reparations !
Or better yet, offer it as a “homeland” for leftists to make their own country out of.
Problem(s) solved !
Only whites in America are homosexuals. I’m in China and have been since the Trumpsuckers stole the election with the help of Comrade Putin.
Puerto Ricans tried to assassinate President Truman. A few years later they shot several congressmen. FALN has committed terrorist bombings. As for language, if Americans ever made this island into a state, bilingualism would have a back door entrance into the USA. Canada style language politics and dysfunctionality would begin. I do not see how Puerto Rico benefits the USA in any way at all.
Puerto Ricans tried to assassinate President Truman. A few years later they shot several congressmen. FALN has committed terrorist bombings.
That was a long time ago. What have they done lately? Beginning with the passage of the Great Society programs, when they were bought off with gringo welfare money, they seem quite content with their status. I believe more people there now support statehood than independence.
As for language, if Americans ever made this island into a state, bilingualism would have a back door entrance into the USA. Canada style language politics and dysfunctionality would begin. I do not see how Puerto Rico benefits the USA in any way at all.
On this I agree. I was just noting that it’s telling that, despite the language barrier, Puerto Ricans seem much less unhappy to be a part of this country than Hawaiians.
SCOTUS said long ago that the Bill of Rights applies to the states but nobody should need SCOTUS to tell them that as the BoR would be meaningless if it did not apply to the states. If it didn’t apply to the states than our rights would just be theoretical.
But if the radical left wants to rewrite the Constitution along the lines of woke political ideology than the right should start doing the same along white nationalist lines and going after the left’s sacred cows.
Hawaii is just a cautionary tale about what will happen as white demographics and political power continue to diminish. It’s becoming more evident every day that the Constitution was written for whites only just like the Founders said it was. With few exceptions it’s only whites who respect and abide by that document at least more so than non-whites generally speaking.
Hawaii and Alaska were made states in the triumphalist 1950s when Butcher Ike was god and it seemed like anything was possible. The Greatest Generation wanted 2 more stars in the flag so the whole nation would have to get re-flagged and everyone had to go out and buy a new one.
Triumphalism is dead. Hawaii will leave the union soon enough, no need to fret over the current goofiness. Japan always wanted it and will take it after a decent interval. Japan wants the land for the Japanese, maybe Samoa will take Hawaiian refugees — figure about 2060, give or take. Japan does not care about Queen Kakkahoopla and will turn Hawaii into Dubai II.
Alaska will be another nut altogether; Russia would probably want it back. Alaska can do fine on its own but joining Canada would be a good move for Anglos in both places. But as Canada goes multicult and Alaska takes in more Asians, a problem naturally arises. As far as white Anglos go, it’s a tough call — will whites start taking their own side by the 2060s? The story so far is not reassuring.
Either way, by 2060 the world will know the Pacific will be an Asian lake. This will be bad for the Anglo-white nations, that is Canada, the USA, Australia, and New Zealand, but by then the Asians will also have shoved whites aside. Unlike palefaces. Asians have both race consciousness AND will to power. The world will first be shocked and then say they knew it all along. Because they have.
All probably true but I daresay it’ll be China not Japan that gets its mitts on Guam and Hawaii.
They’ll probably send S&D over in his fishnet stockings to administer the place. J/K, they have far more sense than that. That’s more like something we’d do.
Not so different from the rest of the country. Queen Lilikuolani instead of Chief Blackhawk or Geronimo. If you think the US is so immoral why don’t you pack your bags and leave? Or are you a “justice seeker” seeking to lead the rest of us in the paths of righteousness?
I think “Labor Theory of Value” would be a more appropriate handle for you. Or “To each according to his needs, from each according to his ability.”
Screen yourself with a shotgun, Judeo-Hapa.
I wish death upon you too, and the hopeful mercy to the Chinese people they don’t get fucked by the Platonic-Semitic ideologies of Communism and 21st-century Catholicism further. With you near the helm, though, I imagine their suffering is only going to get worse.
The Cursed Hot Potato of your blasted soul devastating one people before moving on to ruin another, like a kind of Cuckoo Bird of Gay Globalism.
No such thing as‘state or ‘fed er al or ‘govt or or ‘o fish al’ or other bs non-things. Those and similar are nothing but werdz concocted by cons for their bogus ‘authority and destruction schemes. Their paper ‘law and ‘cosntitution’s are a con, same as monotheism. The scribble ‘ok to have a gun’ then claim have to ‘register’ is bs. Paper ‘rights’ dont matter. What matters is who has more or bigger weapons. People have been stupid to ignore fraud ‘wars and bogus ‘money and let cons get trilions in weapons.
Many comments on thread arent real argument, only ‘within’ the cons bogus frame or ‘box, when there is no real box or limit, other than weapons.
Best focus on reality, where we live.
Remember cavemen.
Having been to Hawaii a few times I must say that it is really a third World country cleverly disguised as a state. Its’ only real value to the United States is its’ strategic location. Were it not for that it would be just another forgotten bit of Pacific real estate.
The native Hawaiian’s are just a bunch of Nig, er I mean brown fucks that are pissed when they see a White face because they know that they are a conquered people. They imagine that somehow their lives would have been better if Captain Cook and White people in general had never found them. But of course they never reflect that their lives have been extended and made easier by White science and every damn bit of technology they have save for surf boards have been provided by the modern White World. Just another place with sky high prices, piss poor medical services and surly brown natives with the obligatory chip on their shoulders. The only good thing is the weather. Paradise indeed!
Sulu
The right to carry arms is a right under Natural Law that the Constitution acknowledges.
The Constitution acknowledges those rights but does not grant them.
Even a ruling by the Supreme Court cannot override Natural Law. Any ruling by the Supreme Court, or state court, that violates Natural Law is to be ignored.
Of course, such ideas have been eliminated from the media and school systems.
The problem with the brown and yellow races is that they have no history of freedom, no idea of Natural Law or a Natural Lawgiver. The real reason that the border is open is to further assault Natural Law so oligarchs(Jews and their pets) can control everything; this would seem perfectly natural to the burnt popcorn kernels.
I find it amazing that people think the 2nd Amendment is there so that people could resist “government tyranny.” Look at who the men were who drafted the Constitution: the nation’s wealthiest merchants, slave owners, war profiteers and land speculators. In their writings they made no secret of their horror of democracy and the common rabble. They met in Philadelphia with the announced intent to revise the Articles of Confederation – which had termed each state “sovereign and independent” – but instead, in secret, they threw out America’s first constitution altogether and replaced it with a strong central government with all the power in their hands. They then sent it to select ratifying conventions where only a tiny fraction of Americans were allowed to vote to accept or reject this virtual coup d’etat.
It is impossible after such a breathtaking power grab that they would deliberately install a mechanism by which the people could remove them from that power. “Well-regulated” means by them, for their behalf, period. Do some research – don’t let mistaken hero worship blind you to the fact that the “liberty” these men spoke of in such lofty terms is not what we consider freedom today.
It is also worthwhile to remember that in Colonial America, guns were very expensive and owned by few. In the days before factories, each was handmade by a skilled gunsmith and might cost the buyer a half year’s wages or more. In addition, shot and powder were by municipal law stored in town magazines. Most of our old cities have streets named “Magazine” or “Powderhouse” that still witness this practice.
Firearms were simply not a great part of American culture in the early days. When Samuel Colt devised a revolutionary method to mass-produce cheap guns in the 1830s, he went bankrupt because not enough people were interested in purchasing them. It was the Civil War that changed America’s habits and accustomed men to the daily carrying and use of firearms. The massive postwar spikes in the rates of crime and homicide were the result of this sinister habit, which began the transformation of a once open, safe American society toward the fearful crime-ridden world we have today.
It’s true that the Founders were wealthy elites who held the rabble in suspicion, but they were not engaged in a sinister plot and genuinely believed the right to bear arms. They were influenced by the English Bill of Rights and an understanding of the need for self-defense from oppressive government officials during the English Civil War.
It is positively incorrect to say that firearms were uncommon and not part of colonial culture. Until the French and Indian War there were no troops garrisoned in the colonies and defense against Indians and law enforcement was carried out by militias, service in which was generally compulsory and ownership of weapons often mandatory.
The massive spikes in post-Civil War crime and homicide came from the freeing of negroes, the implementation of martial law, urbanization, industrialization, and the spike in immigration for cheap white labor.
How does America BENEFIT from keeping Puerto Rico though?
Burning the Constitution would grant the freedom to completely stop acknowledging the current State.
End the legitimacy of the Fedgov entirely and allow the Pogroms to unfurl, then make a new, cleaner document to mandate the slaughter of your spiritual kind.
When it comes to the Constitution of the united States, it exists only on paper because the citizenry has been so conditioned to accept the false notion that our “rights” come from government.
The Constitution of the united States is a charter of “negative rights” that puts strict limits on what government may do, to wit: ” Congress shall make NO LAW, etc.”
According to the wisdom of the founders, our “rights” are endowed by our Creator and cannot be abrogated or limited.
The founders KNEW that eventually, all governments degenerate into fiefdoms and kingdoms, ruled from the top down and that they do get oppressive and disregard their charters.
By declaring that our RIGHTS are inherent in us merely being born, this takes the onus for authority and responsibility from government and puts it squarely on the INDIVIDUAL.
No other system of government has a Constitution that puts the rights of the individual ABOVE that of government.
The Constitution of the united States and its “Bill of Rights” has been so bastardized, abused, ignored and nullified that we no longer live under a Constitutional form of government, and in many ways, are no better than other countries who consider their populations to be “subjects”, required to bend to the will of their “leaders”.
Let’s see Montana or Wyoming allow people to make and sell full auto rifles or suppressors without paperwork or reporting to the feds. Watch how long that lasts.
I’ve been checking around and must agree.
Still, Japan has a few cards left to play. My guess is that taking Hawaii will cost them plenty. But they’ll pay up just to get back at FDR for the scam he pulled in 1941.
Philip K. Dick was right about the Yamato race. They might end up spending more on Hawaii than it’s worth, but it’s the principle of the thing. They’re still right pissed with the long-dead Franklin. I’m not sure I disagree. Sometimes revenge just clears the air and this would be one of those times.
Video Link
Video Link
Is it not time to admit that the government is disintegrating? The factions of opinion however they explain themselves will have no choice but force to push back the people who disagree with them and oppose.
Truly by any traditional reading the justices of the Hawaii court should be impeached and arrested while awaiting trial. The matter obviously is treason. Yet it would seem that matters have gone far enough that the immediate arrest of these justices is not possible and may never be possible. We are clearly approaching the moment when differences will be settled by force. These justices may someday sit in judgement of rebels or themselves stand against the wall to face the judgement of history. Only time will tell.
It matters not what anyone believes because there is no longer any possibility of uniting people through either belief or rational discussion. Belief and ideas are now restricted to rallying the fervor of one’s own group which is useful for the coming fight but not for peaceful resolution of national questions.
The US population is drawing near the time when civil war will once again unite the country under some bitter authority or split it asunder.
LOL. That sounds like “Arming America” redux.