Brimstone Baritone
Regular Member
imported post
This is not a troll post, merely a talking point that I am interested in pursuing. When do we let our desires as gun owners override the constitutional power of our own state governments?
Forgetting for a moment that incorporation would give the basis for lawsuits that might finally settle issues of open carry in restrictive states, and all the good that could come of that, I have to ask one thing:
Why do we see giving up our states' right to home rule as a good thing?
The entire subject of incorporation makes me a little nervous, even though most of the incorporated rights were already recognized in most state constitutions. Say, for instance, the citizens of the state and the constitution they ratified proscribe limits on the right to assemble peaceably saying it can only be exercised at certain times of day, or with a permit, or with a limit on the number of people gathered. With what authority does the Federal government attempt to override that? If you view the Constitution as a limit on Federal power, then where do they have the authority to override state constitutions or legislation that may be legal under the states' constitutions?
OTOH, if something is already legal under the state constitution but the legislature has enacted laws restricting or eliminating it, what authority does the Federal government have to step in and make them repeal it? Shouldn't that also happen at the state level?
Sorry if this doesn't make as much sense on paper (so to speak) as it did in my head. I will try my best to clarify any confusing points.
This is not a troll post, merely a talking point that I am interested in pursuing. When do we let our desires as gun owners override the constitutional power of our own state governments?
Forgetting for a moment that incorporation would give the basis for lawsuits that might finally settle issues of open carry in restrictive states, and all the good that could come of that, I have to ask one thing:
Why do we see giving up our states' right to home rule as a good thing?
The entire subject of incorporation makes me a little nervous, even though most of the incorporated rights were already recognized in most state constitutions. Say, for instance, the citizens of the state and the constitution they ratified proscribe limits on the right to assemble peaceably saying it can only be exercised at certain times of day, or with a permit, or with a limit on the number of people gathered. With what authority does the Federal government attempt to override that? If you view the Constitution as a limit on Federal power, then where do they have the authority to override state constitutions or legislation that may be legal under the states' constitutions?
OTOH, if something is already legal under the state constitution but the legislature has enacted laws restricting or eliminating it, what authority does the Federal government have to step in and make them repeal it? Shouldn't that also happen at the state level?
Sorry if this doesn't make as much sense on paper (so to speak) as it did in my head. I will try my best to clarify any confusing points.