Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:30 pm
Interweb Celebrity
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:47 am Posts: 46000 Location: Reasonville
"endowed by their creator." i believe it too. christian nation, baby!
_________________ No matter how dark the storm gets overhead They say someone's watching from the calm at the edge What about us when we're down here in it? We gotta watch our backs
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 2:34 pm
too drunk to moderate properly
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 7:19 pm Posts: 39068 Location: Chapel Hill, NC, USA Gender: Male
corduroy_blazer wrote:
"endowed by their creator." i believe it too. christian nation, baby!
I was created by my mom.
_________________ "Though some may think there should be a separation between art/music and politics, it should be reinforced that art can be a form of nonviolent protest." - e.v.
Because (call me crazy) I don't trust my fellow citizens of Chicago to lawfully brandish weapons. And because of this decision, Chicago's ban is probably gone.
Any other decision would have scared me. It would be a scary proposition if states and municipalities could make laws that override the constitution.
First, the Bill of Rights is a protection against the Federal government, not state or municipalities. It was only through the 14th Amendment that most, but not all, amendments applied to the states. That's why amendments not specifically incorporated arguably do not apply to states or municipalities (like the 7th Amendment).
Second, I've never read the 2nd Amendment to explicitly guarantee the public's right to bear arms. What I do read it to mean is the guarantee of those that make up the militia (which was, at the time, the general citizenry) to keep arms. Otherwise, the two independent clauses don't make much sense in the same amendment.
Because (call me crazy) I don't trust my fellow citizens of Chicago to lawfully brandish weapons. And because of this decision, Chicago's ban is probably gone.
Oh, and because I hate guns.
All of the people that you're in danger from have guns already, most likely.
_________________ For your sake I hope heaven and hell are really there but I wouldn't hold my breath
Because (call me crazy) I don't trust my fellow citizens of Chicago to lawfully brandish weapons. And because of this decision, Chicago's ban is probably gone.
Oh, and because I hate guns.
All of the people that you're in danger from have guns already, most likely.
I'm not sure. My friend is pretty law abiding, but he's also pretty careless. I don't trust people like him who are sitting in a coffeeshop with a gun in their pants.
Any other decision would have scared me. It would be a scary proposition if states and municipalities could make laws that override the constitution.
First, the Bill of Rights is a protection against the Federal government, not state or municipalities. It was only through the 14th Amendment that most, but not all, amendments applied to the states. That's why amendments not specifically incorporated arguably do not apply to states or municipalities (like the 7th Amendment).
Second, I've never read the 2nd Amendment to explicitly guarantee the public's right to bear arms. What I do read it to mean is the guarantee of those that make up the militia (which was, at the time, the general citizenry) to keep arms. Otherwise, the two independent clauses don't make much sense in the same amendment.
i'm with you on this. and any decision that has a 5-4 majority with those 5 is always suspect.
this case was specific to washington dc? i'm not clear on that
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:29 pm
Reissued
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 20059 Gender: Male
I give a to the ruling... First off, there's no logical way to enforce gun laws preventing ownership except by enforcing a police state mentality. Sure, you can ban stores from selling them, but that simply means that someone either has to find a black market dealer, or go out of town and purchase one in another place, where guns ARE legal, and bring it back. There is really no way to crack down on those people(the second kind). And the fact that those who wish to commit crime have a significant advantage over those who don't, and have no fear that they may have a gun.
_________________ stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:31 pm
Former PJ Drummer
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 1:32 am Posts: 17563
dkfan9 wrote:
I give a to the ruling... First off, there's no logical way to enforce gun laws preventing ownership except by enforcing a police state mentality. Sure, you can ban stores from selling them, but that simply means that someone either has to find a black market dealer, or go out of town and purchase one in another place, where guns ARE legal, and bring it back. There is really no way to crack down on those people(the second kind). And the fact that those who wish to commit crime have a significant advantage over those who don't, and have no fear that they may have a gun.
Not to mention the fact that the constitution is pretty clear on the issue.
_________________
Quote:
The content of the video in this situation is irrelevant to the issue.
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 5:50 pm
Reissued
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm Posts: 20059 Gender: Male
bart d. wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:
I give a to the ruling... First off, there's no logical way to enforce gun laws preventing ownership except by enforcing a police state mentality. Sure, you can ban stores from selling them, but that simply means that someone either has to find a black market dealer, or go out of town and purchase one in another place, where guns ARE legal, and bring it back. There is really no way to crack down on those people(the second kind). And the fact that those who wish to commit crime have a significant advantage over those who don't, and have no fear that they may have a gun.
Not to mention the fact that the constitution is pretty clear on the issue.
A lot of this debate reminds me of a moment from the movie "The American President"(the one with Michael Douglas) in which he praises the ACLU for defending the Constitution then in the next breath talks about his new crime bill that will crackdown on gun ownership. Hey man, just cause it's no. 2 doesn't mean it's non-existent...
_________________ stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part
Post subject: Re: The Supreme Court Decision Discussion Thread
Posted: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:26 pm
Unthought Known
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 am Posts: 7189 Location: CA
If one had such a restrictive view of the second ammendment as to only apply to 'state militias', then it'd be pretty meaningless these days as they've all been federalized.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum