• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

NYC Mayor Conducts Gun-Sale Sting in Arizona

Decisions of the Supreme Court can sometimes be seen as creating new law. Such as if the SCOTUS strikes down laws banning gay marriage.

With is a corruption and usurpation of power.

The courts have no authority to create new law. That authority belongs exclusively to the legislative branch, with a small role of the executive branch. The judicial branch only has the authority to apply existing law. It has no legitimate authority to create new law.
 
I'm not saying they should. I'm trying to get a pro-gun person to take a position on the question one way or the other, and so far not one of them has had the cojones to state an opinion.

When someone is convicted of a felony they serve their time completely, and then they can petition and review to have their rights restored. I believe, and I could be wrong, but I believe that is how it is now.

When you commit a felony, especially a violent one, you give up certain rights. You make that choice.

j-mac

petition
 
I didn't say that they have the formal power to make new laws. But infact, when they strike down one law, they sometimes in effect create a new one.

if SCOTUS strikes down a gay-marriage ban in California, they might indeed be in effect, saying that gay marriage is legal throughout the entire country.

get it?


Which would not be in any way legitimate.

The Constitution says nothing about marriage. Therefore, per the Tenth Amendment, this is a matter for the states and lower governments, and not for the federal government.

There is no legitimate power anywhere within the federal government to force upon states a definition of marriage contrary to what each state chooses to use.

The only way that the federal government could have the legitimate power to interfere in the issue of “same sex marriage” would be to amend the Constitution to explicitly give it that power.
 
I raise my hand, pro-gun here! The basis for the second amendment was to keep the people well-armed so they can support the government if we were under attack AND to provide relief from the government if they attacked the people (I use attack as physical and/or oppression). I think having a gun at home is great, just look at Okla. Woman Shoots, Kills Intruder: 911 Operators Say It's OK to Shoot - ABC News (is that hpw I am supposed to cite sources her? (I am new). Look at countries like Burma (Myannmar) where the people could rise up if they were armed.
 
“Innocent until proven guilty.”....

we'e not talking about someone accused of a crime, now are we?

we're talking about folks wanting to buy a firearm. and if background checks can be instant & easy to produce for everyone, there should be no problem.

........but that's only if you want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
 
we'e not talking about someone accused of a crime, now are we?

we're talking about folks wanting to buy a firearm. and if background checks can be instant & easy to produce for everyone, there should be no problem.

........but that's only if you want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

Criminals will find a way to get a gun if they really want one.
 
In reality they encouraged them to take flying lessons

Seems like you aren't up to speed on your enemies thought process, the clown in the video will explain it to you.

 
Criminals will find a way to get a gun if they really want one.

yes, scum will try their best to find a way to buy a gun.

however, we should do our best to make it as hard as possible, for thugs to buy a gun.

a nation-wide, instant, digital tracking system for all retail & wholesale gun purchases...would be a great move foreward.
 
You have not the education or the experience to possibly understand what I know on this subject since its something I have been involved with over 35 years including having articles published on it and having lectured at ABA accredited law schools on the topic but yes-racism and bigotry were major foundations of gun control in this country

The Racist Roots of Gun Control

I read the article you cite and I also do not believe you. The author is a software engineer with a telecommunications manufacturer in Northern California. What makes him an authority on gun control?
 
good thing the Federal government overstepped its bounds, otherwise much of the South would still be segregated and many Americans would still be second-class citizens.

You have anything to back up that bigotted statement?


He has this:

barack_obama_race_card_poster-rd60b55a016db4e019dde20a7ff902802_a8xy_400.jpg

And this:

67122321d1329029962-thunders-thunderdome-thunder-suck-foolhaiku.gif
 
a nation-wide, instant, digital tracking system for all retail & wholesale gun purchases...would be a great move foreward.

OK 1984. I do not want the government to have yet one more way to keeps tabs on me. Right now it is difficult enough to stay under the radar if you want people to leave you alone, for whatever reason. Do you remember Ruby Ridge? Do you know the outcome of the criminal charges against Randy Weaver?
 
we'e not talking about someone accused of a crime, now are we?

we're talking about folks wanting to buy a firearm. and if background checks can be instant & easy to produce for everyone, there should be no problem.

........but that's only if you want to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.


If checks are so easy now, then why the waiting period as it exists?

j-mac
 
If checks are so easy now, then why the waiting period as it exists?

j-mac

as TD will confirm, most background checks are indeed pretty much instant.

however, gun retail & wholesale records are sent to the ATF on paper...at the dealers whim, when he feels like it.

that should change, it should be digitized & instant.
 
Seems like you aren't up to speed on your enemies thought process, the clown in the video will explain it to you.



I think you would be shocked and embarrassed over your last post if I were to tell you what I know about my "enemies" though I tend to see anti gun types in america to be my enemies every bit as much as those jihadist scum. and people willing to kill thousands and who have the determination and resources to plot 9-11 aren't going to bet deterred by the wet dream laws the ARC wants
 
as TD will confirm, most background checks are indeed pretty much instant.

however, gun retail & wholesale records are sent to the ATF on paper...at the dealers whim, when he feels like it.

that should change, it should be digitized & instant.

that would be gun registration which is not currently legal and should not be
 
as TD will confirm, most background checks are indeed pretty much instant.

however, gun retail & wholesale records are sent to the ATF on paper...at the dealers whim, when he feels like it.

that should change, it should be digitized & instant.
You don't know the first thing about guns. So why do you feel your opinion on checks matter?
 
yeah, a digital, instant background-check system for gun-sales, is tyranny.

:lamo

hmmm.... no, I don't think our government has engaged in illegal surveillance... illegal wiretapping... illegal search and seizure and even "accidental" search and seizure when they "accidentally" enter the wrong structure. By monitoring gun-sales you are putting one more restraint on citizens rights. A background check could have a chilling effect on law abiding citizens who would like to own a gun.
 
...By monitoring gun-sales you are putting one more restraint on citizens rights. A background check could have a chilling effect on law abiding citizens who would like to own a gun.

you clearly don't own a gun, or know much about gun laws.

all gun sales require a background check, accept for private sales and gun-show sales.

and even many of the gun shows now have instant background checks.
 
as TD will confirm, most background checks are indeed pretty much instant.

however, gun retail & wholesale records are sent to the ATF on paper...at the dealers whim, when he feels like it.

that should change, it should be digitized & instant.

If that were the case, then I could say that checks could absolutely be required by everyone at a gun show. However, what are the chances of that? We can't even get liberals to agree that ID is required to vote.


j-mac
 
You don't know the first thing about guns. So why do you feel your opinion on checks matter?

we're not talking about the machanics of firearms. we're talking about gun laws.

if you want to start another thread about the in's & out's of specific firearms, feel free.

and btw, I have shot more than a couple guns in my lifetime.
 
Back
Top Bottom