Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 195

Thread: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

  1. #41
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    I do think it's interesting that the implication is that if it's not required, no one has/gets training. Cuz that is ridiculous. Many people who carry/own guns hunt, shoot for pleasure, grew up with guns, compete, voluntarily get training, any/all the above.
    I'm curious how many people knew how to shoot and handle a gun before they got their training approved by the state? I was taught by my father that was a sniper in the military, but apparently his training is inferior to the states. It reminds me of child care providers being told they aren't experts in how to do their job even if they have been doing it for thirty years, but this person that has been doing their job for a week is. It's pretty goddamn insulting, imho.

  2. #42
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,854

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    Does anyone thing it's a good idea to carry a concealed weapon when meeting the president? Or what about on a plane? There are certainly places in which no one thinks it's a good idea to allow even small arms. Once we accept that some forms of small arms regulations are inevitable, then we have to decide who's in the best position to make those decisions.

    If you accept that the government can ban handguns in the vicinity of the president, then the government obviously has the ability to ban handguns. If SCOTUS would have determined that a community can't regulate conceled carry permits, then is any one allowed to regulate it? Where is the line? Why couldn't I then take a handgun on a plane?

    I think local governments are in the best position to determine gun laws. The latest ruling by the SCOTUS would seem to agree.
    The govt bans *people* in general from around the president. Lots of them, anyone it chooses, anyone it doesnt approve of, anyone it doesnt like the looks of. That doesnt mean it has the right (or intent) to ban people in public.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  3. #43
    Sage
    WCH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    The Lone Star State.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    22,161

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    It is not legal to open carry a handgun in Texas except on your property, in your car/boat or going to your car (how it legally got away from your car is unclear). It is also not legal in Texas to open carry a handgun even with a CHL (bill pending to change that) in public.
    Yes, it must be concealed from public view. (not referring to open carry) Before you had to have the ammo and gun stored separately in your vehicle or boat or have a special permit/reason to carry a loaded weapon in a vehicle or boat.
    32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven. 33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
    Matt. 10:32-33

  4. #44
    Global Moderator
    The Truth is out there.
    Kal'Stang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Bonners Ferry ID USA
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    32,858
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    'Ya know, I am kind of in the middle regarding this issue. I do feel that background checks should be necessary so that criminals and crazy people cannot legally purchase a gun. However, once passing a background check, I very strongly feel that carrying a gun is a constitutional right, per the second amendment. I believe the members of the Supreme Court are being cowards in avoiding this issue. And since this is the Roberts court, I am somewhat surprised, not to mention deeply disappointed.

    Discussion?

    Article is here.
    It's BS that they didn't take it up. I can understand them punting cases that are not so direct as this one. But frankly this is so obvious that it boggles the mind that there would be some question to it. Such a Constitutional question could have been resolved in a day at most. And yet such a ruling would have affected the whole of the US in a positive way.

    And yes, I realize that some think it would be negative. Frankly, I don't care what they think. I'm sick of anti-gun nuts trying to infringe on peoples right to own a gun every single friggen chance they get.
    I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang

    My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang

  5. #45
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,854

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    But what is constitutional carry? That's the point I was trying to get at.

    Can a community require you to take a class or pass a test before giving you a conceal carry licence? Can they charge a fee? When you get down to it, you don't need a permit to do anything that's constitutionally protected. So saying that conceal carry is a constitutional right essentially means that the entire conceal carry permit process is unconstitutional in every jurisdiction. That's a scary thought. Because lets face it, no one thinks that everyone should have a gun.

    Gun enthusiasts may be very pro second amendment, but they're also VERY pro safety. Talk to anyone with a gun and they can spend hours telling you the proper way to load, store, clean, stand, fire, etc.. IMO, everyone has a right to carry the same way that everyone has a right to drive a car. If you do it right, the government should leave you the hell alone. Do it wrong, endanger your neighbors, and yeah... please take that guys gun away.
    As it is, a gun owner/carrier must know and obey the laws in any states where they travel. And there are many and they differ everywhere. Now you would like to see that expanded to communities randomly?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    I have felt pain when I was in the womb. So when you say they are incapable of feeling pain, that is based on junk science.
    Quote Originally Posted by applejuicefool View Post
    A murderer putting a bullet through someone's brain is a medical procedure too.

  6. #46
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,580

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    But what is constitutional carry? That's the point I was trying to get at.

    Can a community require you to take a class or pass a test before giving you a conceal carry licence? Can they charge a fee? When you get down to it, you don't need a permit to do anything that's constitutionally protected. So saying that conceal carry is a constitutional right essentially means that the entire conceal carry permit process is unconstitutional in every jurisdiction. That's a scary thought. Because lets face it, no one thinks that everyone should have a gun.

    Gun enthusiasts may be very pro second amendment, but they're also VERY pro safety. Talk to anyone with a gun and they can spend hours telling you the proper way to load, store, clean, stand, fire, etc.. IMO, everyone has a right to carry the same way that everyone has a right to drive a car. If you do it right, the government should leave you the hell alone. Do it wrong, endanger your neighbors, and yeah... please take that guys gun away.
    Several errors in logic here. Yes, everyone (adult and not under a court order) has that and every other constitutional right. Rights are what we all have unless taken away by due process of law. Driving (on public roadways) is a state issued privilege - nobody has that "right" (actually a privilege) until and unless the state grants it. That, in a nut shell, is the difference between a right and a privilege.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  7. #47
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:44 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    There is a vast gap between something not being a good idea and it being declared a felony. If you wish to declare some gun free zones and actually enforce them then that is OK by me - so long as the state (or whoever declared the gun free zone) is 100% liable for anyone shot, raped, robbed or assaulted inside of them. It is insane to expect a sign or a law to stop criminals - that requires actual security and law enforcement personnel.
    I'd say that would fall into the criminal negligence category. If I have a gun free zone and I don't bother to provide any security when there are known threats then sure.. the governing body is at least partially responsible. (I'd not make it 100% as the actual shooter/rapist/robber still bears a good bit of the blame).

    But once we acknowledge that the government must be allowed to regulate arms; we have to start thinking about how much they should be allowed to regulate and who gets to make the final determination as to what's the right amount and what's too much. Honest people are going to have honest disagreements about what that is. eg.. can the permitting authority mandate that you have to take an instructional class before you can conceal carry? Does a blind person have a right to conceal carry a handgun? But someone is going to have to make that determination. I'd rather that be a few of my neighbors rather than 5 people I've never met on a bench in DC.

  8. #48
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:44 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,671

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    As it is, a gun owner/carrier must know and obey the laws in any states where they travel. And there are many and they differ everywhere. Now you would like to see that expanded to communities randomly?
    I'm not sure what you're trying to say. I think communities have the right to regulate arms providing the regulations serve a justifiable public benefit. There's nothing random about it.

  9. #49
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:19 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,479

    Re: U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Paxaeon View Post
    `
    I disagree. If the states want autonomy from the federal government, they have to pass better laws that are constitutionally sound. This includes the prohibition of certain individuals from owning guns. Going to SCOTUS because they lack the guts to take unpopular stands, is not an excuse.
    I'm not following you. The states didn't go to the SCOTUS. Private citizens appealed to the SCOTUSbecause the Federal 3rd circuit court ruled that the NJ law was constitutional. The citizens are completely within their rights appeal to the SC and as you noted the SC can decide to not hear the appeal.
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

  10. #50
    Don't Give a Rat's Ass
    SMTA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    OH
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    21,841

    U.S. Supreme Court declines new gun regulations challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Summerwind View Post
    I would add that to carry outside the home, one should also have full FBI variety background check, pass a required gun safety/handling/proficiency course, and register your firearm. This is what I had to do to get a CCW in Idaho, one of the reddest states in the country, well, I didn't have to register my handgun, but I think probably I should have been required to if I was going to carry such that if my gun and I got separated and the police arrived, the police would immediately know what they were looking for and what threat it might cause them.
    Same background check required in OH.

    It still does not make it right, though.

    Frankly, it was a non-issue for me.
    Greatness lies not in being strong, but in the right use of strength - Henry Ward Beecher
    Baby sister, I was born game and I intend to go out that way - Rooster Cogburn

Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •