Voting and driving as rights/ statuatory rights

[exceltoexcel]

I'm starting this thread from this one ...

http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...r-page-11.html

[exceltoexcel]

I'll give you some more voting rights in the constitution

Amendment 15 - Race No Bar to Vote. Ratified 2/3/1870. History

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.



Amendment 19 - Women's Suffrage. Ratified 8/18/1920. History

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Amendment 24 - Poll Tax Barred. Ratified 1/23/1964. History

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Amendment 26 - Voting Age Set to 18 Years. Ratified 7/1/1971. History

1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


It is a right in the us constitution.

It doesn't matter if it was in the original bill of rights, it is in the original constitution as how we elect the president, it is in the constitution several times as an amendment.

If we wright a new amendment that says it is a right to wear a pink hat then it is a right protected by the constitution.

The ruling of the supreme court.

1: only applies to that instance the only time in history they ever limited a ruling like that.

and

2. Only said that the federal system doesn't dictate how a vote is conducted only the states do that.

However...

The means of conducting must be not violated the protected rights of voting set within the constitution.

A state can set any way of conducting a vote.

The feds cannot intervene there..

[exceltoexcel]

http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/06...chap73toc.html


Here is the beginning of the driving statute http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/06...chap73toc.html

You'll have to weave through the web of laws to find out what is necessary to meet the statutory right to drive...

[sjl127]

Huh?

[exceltoexcel]

Originally Posted by sjl127

Huh?

You have to go back to the thread I posted to catch up.

The argument here is two fold.

The most appalling is that voting is a privilege and not a right!

The second that driving is a statutory right, that if you meet the statue set forth by any state that you then have the right to drive and it is not a privilege.

[DarthJoe]

Good info, I was unaware that driving was a right...I was always under the impression it was a priviledge.

You learn somethin' new every day!

[ThomasJ]

Originally Posted by exceltoexcel

You have to go back to the thread I posted to catch up.

The argument here is two fold.

The most appalling is that voting is a privilege and not a right!

The second that driving is a statutory right, that if you meet the statue set forth by any state that you then have the right to drive and it is not a privilege.

There is nothing appalling about it; it's a fact.

And the word "right" does not appear in your driving statute. Do a word search.

Driving is a privilege, not a right.

Seriously, I urge you to do some research regarding the "right" to vote. In your effort to make some of those words in bold, you left out the important ones that follow "on account of".

[exceltoexcel]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statutory_right

A statutory right is a right granted to a person by authority of a statute. Statutes are created by legislative (and in certain countries executive) bodies, and form the codified law of a jurisdiction. For example, a statute governing court process might contain provisions giving an election on either party to an appeal, and that right to appeal would be considered statutory.

Here is the beginning of the driving statute http://www.pacode.com/secure/data/06...chap73toc.html

Talk to a lawyer, he can explain it to you.

[exceltoexcel]

Originally Posted by ThomasJ

There is nothing appalling about it; it's a fact.

And the word "right" does not appear in your driving statute. Do a word search.

Driving is a privilege, not a right.

Seriously, I urge you to do some research regarding the "right" to vote. In your effort to make some of those words in bold, you left out the important ones that follow "on account of".

That is why it is called a statutory right!!!

If you comply with the statute you have a right to drive..

People confuse this with privilege.

Privilege is when someone allows you to do something that they control entirely. You don't have a right to use mom and dad's car. It is then a privalege.

however if you have a LTCF you have a statutory right to carry a concealed firearm within the confines of the law..



here's the lesson...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privilege

A privilege—etymologically "private law" or law relating to a specific individual—is a special entitlement or immunity granted by a government or other authority to a restricted group, either by birth or on a conditional basis. A privilege can be revoked in some cases. In modern democracies, a privilege is conditional and granted only after birth. By contrast, a right is an inherent, irrevocable entitlement held by all citizens or all human beings from birth. Miscellaneous privileges, e.g. the old common law privilege to title deeds, may still exist, though of little relevance today.[1]

In a broader sense, 'privilege' can refer to special powers or 'de facto' immunities held as a consequence of political power or wealth. Privilege of this sort may be transmitted by birth into a privileged class or achieved through individual actions. Compare elite.

One of the objectives of the French Revolution was the abolition of privilege. This meant the removal of separate laws for different social classes (nobility, clergy and ordinary people), instead subjecting everyone to the same common law. Privileges were abolished by the National Constituent Assembly on August 4, 1789.

It falls into neither privilege or right.

that is why it is a statutory right..

[unloved]

Would everyone please read the 9th ammendment. Okay, now explain to me why anyone thinks that anything has to be specifically addressed by our U.S. Constitution in order to be a right.