Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 213

Thread: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

  1. #101
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    I guess that makes the Bill of Rights a pretty pointless document.

    There was once a day when people thought that voting rights for black people was dangerous to the populace and should be restricted. Maybe we should go back down that road again?
    For some reason some people think appeal to majority is somehow superior to the constitution, it makes me wonder what has gone wrong with our educational system that they can't understand the very plain english of the constitution or our founding writings.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  2. #102
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    My bad, Bush is like the one eyed guy and Cheney is the fat idiot who hangs with him. Better?

    .....Pintel and Ragetti....now find a scene from the movie and liken Bush and Cheney to it.....

  3. #103
    Voluntary Resignation

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    11-30-10 @ 05:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,059

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    For some reason some people think appeal to majority is somehow superior to the constitution, it makes me wonder what has gone wrong with our educational system that they can't understand the very plain english of the constitution or our founding writings.
    No kidding. "Shall not be infringed" seems pretty straightforward to me.

    A proper civics education should point out that the whole reason for having a constitution to begin with is to avoid the tyranny of the majority issue.

  4. #104
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by NoJingoLingo View Post
    We the people decide that some things are dangerous to the populace and restrict them. That was pretty simple.
    So, you cannot describe a 2nd amedment analogue to yelling fire in a theater.
    Thanks.

  5. #105
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Coronado View Post
    No kidding. "Shall not be infringed" seems pretty straightforward to me.
    You'd be amazed at how many people seem to get confused over that one.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  6. #106
    Voluntary Resignation

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    11-30-10 @ 05:20 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    7,059

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    You'd be amazed at how many people seem to get confused over that one.
    A lot of them wind up in Congress somehow, too.

  7. #107
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    You'd be amazed at how many people seem to get confused over that one.
    The problem is that exactly what constitutes "arms" is debatable.

    Pistol? Sure.
    Rifle? Why not.
    Automatic rifle? Fine by me, virtually no crimes have ever been committed with automatic weapons. (someone explain to the media what automatic really is, please!)
    Grenade launcher? Errr, getting sketchy.
    Patriot missile battery? Ummm
    Tank?
    Nuclear warheads?

    Not too many people would argue that nuclear weapons should be legal for private ownership. Similarly, not too many people would argue that you should never be able to own a gun at any time or place. While I hate the cliche, the answer is surely somewhere in between.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #108
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    The problem is that exactly what constitutes "arms" is debatable.
    The point that every class of firearm falls under the definition of 'arms' is not.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    stupid analogy. You are allowed to yell fire if the theater is empty or if there is a fire. You cannot fire a machine gun in a crowded theater unless you have a lawful reason. No one is suggesting banning Yelling fire under all circumstances but the hoplophobes want to ban mere possession of certain or all firearms along with use
    Actually, the prohibition against yelling fire in a CROWDED theater is precisely because it's crowded, and it's common knowlege that people are prone to panic, and the prohibition is based on someone actually yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater and people were killed in the stampede.'

    All that is irrelevant.

    Citing the "fire in a crowded theater" condition on the First Amendment is not applicable. What the gun grabbers are trying with their false analogy is to say that all people should have their mouths banned, because they may be used to yell "fire" inappropriately.

    The damage is done by yelling "fire", not by having a voice. The prohibition against yelling "fire" is a prohibition against certain vocal acts. Laws already exist that prohibit certain actions with guns, ie, armed robbery is a felony, hence the application of the "Fire in a Crowded Theater" constraint on the First Amendment is already in place as a constraint on the Second Amendment.

  10. #110
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Supreme Court Hears Arguments On Chicago Gun Ban

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    They're really more like guidelines...

    No.

    They're the Law.

Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... 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
  •