by Saz » Thu Apr 09, 2015 3:13 pm
yes and every other word in that amendment imposes restrictions on it, which means it does not explicitly say the state can do this. It envisions a world in which the state can do this provided set requirements are met. If none of them are met, the state cannot de facto do it. This is exactly what I mean about having no respect for the bill of rights. You see it not as a restriction on the state but as somehow granting the state certain powers.
DON'T BE A TOUGH GUY. DON'T BE A FOOL! I WILL CALL YOU LATER.