How Would the Founding Fathers Handle People Who Disregarded the Constitution?

So Justice Stephen Breyer was on Larry King trying to have a being old contest, and Breyer said he’s against gun rights because according to his Founding Father fan fiction they didn’t really mean it when they wrote the 2nd Amendment.

Why become a Supreme Court Justice if you hate the Constitution? Obviously Breyer sees the Constitution as just an obstacle to whatever he wants, so he has to keep coming up with increasingly asinine and convoluted reasons to ignore what it plainly says. Anyway, as a historian, I will tell you of what the Founding Father’s think of Breyers opinion: musket to the junk!

One of the failings in writing the Constitution was not realizing how completely idiotic some Justices would be in ignoring everything written in it. If the Founding Fathers had realized this, they probably would have written a “musket to the junk” provision to handle Justices like Breyer who are extremely blatant in disregarding the Constitution. Of course, you’d have some liberal judge today saying you could use a rifle instead of a musket, but that’s not what it says. READ WHAT IT SAYS AND GO BY THAT!

18 Comments

  1. Or, they would have added one last “check and balance” in a provision like the proposed new states rights amendment:

    “Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several States, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several States approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed.”

    That would have kept both Congress and the SCOTUS in check.

  2. Jimmy, that is brillaint. Bravo. Bravo.

    If Breyer was a chemistry teacher he would keep blowing up the classroom because, what the hey, who needs to follow mthe instructions.

    What was the evening’s theme, Depends on Larry King ?

  3. So how does Musket to the junk work on Kagan and Soutamier (sp? and I don’t care)? Supreme Court chairs should be wired with 220 volts and each justice should have to shave part of the top of their heads. Then before court starts they are each wired up to “old sparky” complete with the skull cap, and any deviation from the constitution trips the non-constitutional switch and…well…we are looking for another Supreme!

  4. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

    Maybe our founding fathers would have been better off just writing “the right to keep and bear Arms shall NOT be infringed”

  5. It’s a crying shame that the Federalist Papers are no longer taught in High School. Madison and Hamilton discussed this issue over 200 years ago. In No. 18, Hamilton advocated waterboarding of any Supreme Court justice who went wobbly on the Constitution. In No. 21, Madison took the high ground by arguing in favor of shoving pencils up the nose of any justice who, “…shall not ceaseth to be a traitorous moron.”

    This was to be the XI amendment, but X seemed a much rounder number, so it was lost to history.

  6. The IMAOan known as Jimmy presents this brief before the Court of Arrogant Opinion:

    1) Ussjimmycarter, that plan is messy, smelly, smokey and requires cleanup! (But it does have high entertainment value.)

    2) Your argument seems to come ‘down’ to the “equal protection clause” which would effectively prohibit “muskets to the junk” from applying equally to female SCOTUSes, ostensibly because they don’t have “junk” in the same location. I shall eschew discussion of the last part of your assumption to a later time so as to not invoke the ire of female members present.

    3) So, instead, how about trap doors?!

    4) Under each justice’s chair is a trap door. If they vote the wrong way – or even so much as utter an unconstitutional thought – a red light comes on, a horn sounds and a loud, deep voice says: “Unconstitutional!!! Sorry, asshole, you are O B S O L E T E.” Then the trap door opens to an acid pit.

    5) I hope you agree this solution is clean and tidy – and avoids its own constitutional undoing indicated in Paragraph 2) above.

  7. “READ WHAT IT SAYS AND GO BY THAT!” THIS PART HERE!!!!

    This very subject drives me into revolutionary mode. This isn’t just a small problem it’s an ongoing cancer and we’re at stage 4. We’ve slid so far down the slippery slope that our plunge into chaos seems almost inevitable.

    I’m not sure if there is a nice way to say this so here goes. People in positions of authority who publicly and with complete disregard, violate the constitution need to be dealt with quickly and violently for the rest of America to see.

    Our elected and appointed officials need to worry about pain of death should they just decide they get to make up the rules or reinterpret them badly. I don’t think anyone in Congress is really worried about being corrupt. There seems not to be a penalty against it. If Rangel was worried about a firing squad instead of a little slap on the wrist he may have already resigned for good.

    Stephen Breyer uttering what he did on Larry King should at the least get him removed from the very position that he holds. If not that what would constitute removal from the bench. I don’t know how much more you can give the Constitution the bird but that would seem to be a pretty big single finger salute to the founders.

    I better stop now. Yeah damn straight hit’m in the junk with a musket butt repeatedly until he can read clearly. Then when he reads it correctly and understand it hit him again for good measure. Don’t worry I’ve heard the women don’t like to get hit in their junk either.

  8. As always, the Constitution as written provides the solution if we’d just follow it. Impeach and remove him and every other activist judge who views themselves above the Constitution.

    Nowhere does the Constitution grant judges a lifetime appointment. Instead, it grants them an appointment for a term of “good behavior.” Good behavior, at a minimum, includes following the Constitution as written.

    It took about 200 years for the tyrants on the left to figure out this supposed end-run around the Constitution by asserting judicial independence (unaccountability to the people). But the Founders anticipated this, although they thought it would be unlikely (see Federalist 78). Judicial tyranny will stop if Congress starts impeaching federal judges and justices for unlawful decisions that encroach upon the legislative and executive functions.

  9. Chestertonrocks! wrote:
    As always, the Constitution as written provides the solution if we’d just follow it.

    there’s a reason it keeps being described with words like “brilliant” and “genius” and that was before we decided “smart” was an honorary award. Go back to the real words of the document, you have to go back a very long way.

  10. “Thus we may say that a permanent ideal is as necessary to the innovator as to the conservative; it is necessary whether we wish the king’s orders to be promptly executed or whether we only wish the king to be promptly executed. The guillotine has many sins, but to do it justice there is nothing evolutionary about it. The favorite evolutionary (progressive) argument finds it’s best answer in the axe. The Evolutionist says, “Where do you draw the line?” The Revolutionist answers, “I draw it Here: exactly between your head and body.”
    – G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy.

    But if you don’t have a guillotine handy, a Musket to the Junk works for me!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.