Page 7 of 20 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 195

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

  1. #61
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,782

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    But the words "well regulated" do. I think there's a huge difference between what should the gun laws be and what should the gun laws be allowed to be. IMO, SCOTUS isn't the place to make gun laws.
    "Well-regulated" in the language of the time referred to training

    "Regular army" was the military. "Irregulars" were the militias.
    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.

  2. #62
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-11-17 @ 01:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,670

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    Who likes the idea of cc permits? Several states now do not require them. No blood in the streets yet.

    And who says someone shouldnt buy a gun, hollowpoints, and walk down the street, all brandy new? I had my permit after a (voluntary) 2 hour ladies handgun class and had my permit before my 9mm even came in the mail. I shot it at the FFL/range where it came in, re-loaded it, and off I went to Wally World in search of cheap FMJ to practice with.

    I did commit to training, still do it....but it's not up to you or anyone else to assume people are just irresponsible because they dont meet your comfort level of training or attitude. It's a *right*.
    Great! The people who live in a state have the right to regulate arms in their state. That's what the second amendment states.

    There's a huge difference between trying to argue what the concealed carry policy should be and what the concealed carry policy MUST be.

  3. #63
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-11-17 @ 01:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,670

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    States and communities are 2 very different things which you keep avoiding. And I dont think NYC should have different gun laws than the rest of the state.
    States supersede localities. If a state law or constitutional amendment says that all communities must have the same cc permit policies, then I think that's constitutionally correct. If they don't and each community has a different set of restrictions, then I think the constitution supports that.

    We aren't arguing if any of that is a good idea, only if the constitution allows it.

  4. #64
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,782

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Summerwind View Post
    When I was cc'd in Vancouver WA before moving to Idaho, I went through training and a background check. Now is that because it was a police officer down the street who assisted me in getting cc'd or was it the law? That I can't say for sure. I assumed it was the law. Nonetheless, there's never a harm in requiring people who legally want to be able to operate a deadly machine in a public place to take a test to show reasonable knowledge of the laws, the policies, and the operation of said machine.
    The problem is that it is discriminatory....and that discrimination against a very basic right.

    Training costs money. *Mandatory* training can be very expensive and every state is different, but some cost hundreds of dollars. The training requirements are different in each state and no one agrees on how much is enough...there's no evidence that 'mandatory' training prevents anything. Because most people acquire training on their own, in different ways. Of course, everyone agrees that training is a good idea, just not if it must be mandated...there's no evidence supporting it.

    Driving is a privilege, gun ownership is a right.
    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.

  5. #65
    Hot Flash Mama
    Summerwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Last Seen
    01-23-17 @ 05:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,010

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    The problem is that it is discriminatory....and that discrimination against a very basic right.

    Training costs money. *Mandatory* training can be very expensive and every state is different, but some cost hundreds of dollars. The training requirements are different in each state and no one agrees on how much is enough...there's no evidence that 'mandatory' training prevents anything. Because most people acquire training on their own, in different ways. Of course, everyone agrees that training is a good idea, just not if it must be mandated...there's no evidence supporting it.

    Driving is a privilege, gun ownership is a right.
    That's a ridiculous and convoluted argument of the extreme right wing nutjobs. Bless your heart.
    jallman: "It's all good. At least you have a thick skin and can take being poked fun back at without crying. "

  6. #66
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,782

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    Great! The people who live in a state have the right to regulate arms in their state. That's what the second amendment states.

    There's a huge difference between trying to argue what the concealed carry policy should be and what the concealed carry policy MUST be.
    WHere does it say that?
    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.

  7. #67
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,566

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
    But the words "well regulated" do. I think there's a huge difference between what should the gun laws be and what should the gun laws be allowed to be. IMO, SCOTUS isn't the place to make gun laws.
    We are well beyond getting all of that toothpaste back into the tube. Well regulated applied to the militia which meant that it needed to be well supplied and trained - at the time they had plenty of folks to do the training but lacked the arms, thus the people having arms was an asset not taken lightly. The SCOTUS realized in past decisions that a right of the people is not a right of the people in the militia.

    I agree that the SCOTUS does not make laws but is our only means to ensure that the laws made do not violate the constitutional rights and powers defined.
    “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

  8. #68
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-11-17 @ 01:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,670

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Lursa View Post
    WHere does it say that?
    It's probably a good idea to read some of the case law regarding the full text of the second amendment.
    Annotated Constitution Prototype

  9. #69
    Sage
    Lursa's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Outside Seattle
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    29,782

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Summerwind View Post
    That's a ridiculous and convoluted argument of the extreme right wing nutjobs. Bless your heart.
    I'm a liberal Democrat, bless your heart. And I've participated in several discussions on this on gun forums and the bold statement is factual.

    Here's the only study that anyone came up with, coicidentally, quite local:

    WA state requires no training at all and is a SHall-issue state.
    OR requires training and is a May-issue state.

    WA has a larger population and a larger urban population. (and a higher number of permits)
    OR has a higher number of gun-related accidents and incidents.

    This isnt about crime...crime has nothing to do with permits or training.
    Last edited by Lursa; 05-05-14 at 05:55 PM. Reason: added about higher # of permits
    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.

  10. #70
    Guru

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    12-11-17 @ 01:16 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,670

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    We are well beyond getting all of that toothpaste back into the tube. Well regulated applied to the militia which meant that it needed to be well supplied and trained - at the time they had plenty of folks to do the training but lacked the arms, thus the people having arms was an asset not taken lightly. The SCOTUS realized in past decisions that a right of the people is not a right of the people in the militia.

    I agree that the SCOTUS does not make laws but is our only means to ensure that the laws made do not violate the constitutional rights and powers defined.
    Totally agree. So now we have to make a distinction between laws we don't like, and laws that are unconstitutional. All reasonable people accept the need for some regulations. And once you're there, you need a test to determine when a particular law is no longer a reasonable restriction.

Page 7 of 20 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... 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
  •