Page 57 of 64 FirstFirst ... 7475556575859 ... LastLast
Results 561 to 570 of 631

Thread: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

  1. #561
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuz Life View Post
    I addressed and quoted your post.

    No need to repeat myself.
    Fine with me. I'll allow the readers to judge.

  2. #562
    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: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    This is not a fact, Ikari. There has been a study done on the phrase, "the right to bear arms" and it's usage in the 17th and 18th Centuries. There were found to be over 300 different usages of the term, ranging across the spectrum from carrying, owning, performing military service, and many others. The most commonly accepted usage during the time was as a synomym for carrying arms. Regardless, the term, even THEN is ambiguous at best. So, no, your definition is by no means definitive, and mine is and was more widely accepted.

    I am still going through the study on this concept, a completely fascinating paper. I will try to give an overview of the results in the next day or so, along with the link, but what I am reading supports the definition that I have put forth as the most common usage.
    It is not ambiguous at best, only so if you're trying to construct a silly reach around argument. The fact of the matter is that the purpose to keep and bear arms is to fight, there's little purpose in making it legal to "hold" a gun if the necessity is to fight foreign or domestic threats to our liberty. To continually say "well I looked into it, but it doesn't say you can use the gun" is abject stupidity and nothing more. Sorry, but that's the reality of the situation. We had not long ago (in terms of the construction of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights) beaten the English and tried a form of government which had failed, so the founders needed a government with a slightly stronger central government, but that was also a danger. The 2nd is there to ensure the People have the proper tools to defend themselves should their lives and liberty be threatened by another source. They're not going to sit there and say "Oh...well you can hold a gun, but not fire it".

    No, as the purpose was duty to the militia, the People had need to operate their guns as well. As such, the definition of "to bear" includes the functional use of the tool in question. As the dictionary meaning of the word includes.

    Oxford English Dictionary Sign In
    4. In many phrases. a. to arms! (formerly [OFr.] as armes! at arms!): take to your arms, be ready for fight! b. in arms: armed, furnished with weapons, sword in hand, prepared to fight; as to rise in arms (of a number); up in arms, in active readiness to fight, actively engaged in struggle or rebellion; also fig. c. to take up arms: to arm oneself, rise in hostility defensive or offensive, to draw the sword; also fig. to bear arms: to serve as a soldier, do military service, fight. to turn one's arms against: to make war upon, attack. to lay down arms: to surrender, cease hostilities, give up the struggle.
    a. 1330 R. BRUNNE Chron. 162 Richard, ‘has armes!’ did crie. c1380 Sir Ferumb. 2933 ‘Asarmes!’ {th}anne cride Rolond, ‘asarmes, euerechon!’ c1450 Merlin xxii. 406 And ronne to armes moo than xxvii squyers. c1450 LONELICH Grail xiii. 231 Anon, ‘As Armez,’ they gonnen to crie. 1470-85 MALORY Arthur I. xi. (1634) 22 ‘Lords, at arms! for here be your enemies at your hand.’ 1711 POPE Rape Lock v. 37 To arms! to arms! the fierce Virago cries. 1842 MACAULAY Horatius xx, To arms! To arms! Sir Consul.
    b. 1503 HAWES Examp. Virtue vii. 97 Whan in armes..He all his ennemyes dyd abiecte. 1588 SHAKES. L.L.L. V. ii. 636 Heere comes Hector in Armes. 1593 {emem} 2 Hen. VI, IV. i. 93 Hating thee, and rising vp in armes. 1611 BIBLE 1 Macc. xii. 27 Ionathan commaunded his men..to be in armes. 1704 SWIFT T. Tub Apol., All the men of wit..were immediately up in Arms. 1810 SCOTT Lady of L. III. xiv, In arms the huts and hamlets rise. 1868 Digby's Voy. Medit. Pref. 32 As soon as the facts came to the knowledge of the Admiralty..Buckingham's Secretary was up in arms.
    c. 1297 R. GLOUC. 63 Alle {th}at armes bere A{ygh}en {th}e king. c1590 MARLOWE Massac. Paris III. i, The Guise hath taken arms against the King. 1602 SHAKES. Ham. III. i. 59 To take Armes against a Sea of troubles. 1769 ROBERTSON Charles V, V. III. 329 Obliged to take arms in self-defence. Ibid. V. IV. 410 He turned his arms against Naples. 1795 SEWELL Hist. Quakers I. Pref. 7 For bearing arms and resisting the wicked by fighting. 1831 BREWSTER Newton (1855) II. xiv. 2 Newton took up arms in his own cause. 1848 ST. JOHN Fr. Rev. 245 Lay down your arms. 1872 YEATS Growth Comm. 180


    This is consistent with every use of the word "arms", be it to lay down arms, take up arms, etc. that was used at the time. So you can stop with the little side show because it's so nonsensical it causes brain cells to commit suicide. Leave the little buggers alone, they're just trying to think.
    Last edited by Ikari; 07-06-10 at 12:36 PM.
    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."

  3. #563
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    What is your proof of this? Your opinion?

    My proof is simple really, look at where we started, and where we are today. If you can honestly say that liberal influence on the court, and an interpretation of the constitution as it applied to laws in this country hasn't been twisted to suit a "living, breathing" bent toward making law, then I think you are just not addressing this in any honest fashion.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  4. #564
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    My proof is simple really, look at where we started, and where we are today. If you can honestly say that liberal influence on the court, and an interpretation of the constitution as it applied to laws in this country hasn't been twisted to suit a "living, breathing" bent toward making law, then I think you are just not addressing this in any honest fashion.


    j-mac
    I need not look any further than Bush v Gore to prove who is making law. BTW, it is really strange that even the ones who made the call for Bush said that it should not set a precedent. So much for conservatives being for states' rights.

  5. #565
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    I need not look any further than Bush v Gore to prove who is making law. BTW, it is really strange that even the ones who made the call for Bush said that it should not set a precedent. So much for conservatives being for states' rights.

    Oh Please, spare us....The Fl SC was botching that up and everyone knows it. Wouldn't have been a question in the first place had Gore not tried to steal Fl.


    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  6. #566
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Oh Please, spare us....The Fl SC was botching that up and everyone knows it. Wouldn't have been a question in the first place had Gore not tried to steal Fl.


    j-mac
    Yeah, tell me about the ninth and tenth amendments that conservatives are so fond of except when it goes against your wishes. Bush is the one who stole the election.

  7. #567
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    Yeah, tell me about the ninth and tenth amendments that conservatives are so fond of except when it goes against your wishes. Bush is the one who stole the election.

    Ok, explain to me then why Gore wouldn't concede to recounting ALL the votes? eh? Why only select districts that he was actively trying to either suppress the vote count, or those which he could gerrymander?

    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  8. #568
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    Yeah, tell me about the ninth and tenth amendments that conservatives are so fond of except when it goes against your wishes. Bush is the one who stole the election.
    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Ok, explain to me then why Gore wouldn't concede to recounting ALL the votes? eh? Why only select districts that he was actively trying to either suppress the vote count, or those which he could gerrymander?
    Actually, I've gotta disagree with both of you. I'd say that the SCOTUS stole the election and handed it to Bush.

    Quote Originally Posted by LiberalAvenger View Post
    I need not look any further than Bush v Gore to prove who is making law. BTW, it is really strange that even the ones who made the call for Bush said that it should not set a precedent. So much for conservatives being for states' rights.
    QFT. The Court split directly down the partisan fault line in that election, 5 right wingers for Bush four left wingers for Gore. It was scandalous from a rule of law standpoint. And the right-wing activist justices who stole the election even tacitly acknowledge what they were doing, and declared in dicta that the Bush v. Gore decision is not to be used as precedent in any future decision. There's a lot of dispute over whether or not they can even do that, and this dicta is itself a minor scandal, as a decision is necessarily precedent, and the Bush v. Gore decision has important ramifications in election law if it is considered to be precedent.

    Bush and Gore both had a right to argue their case, and the Court should have been a neutral arbiter of the law. It's a tragedy that the court is now more of a superlegislature that can't be counted on to serve its function without any degree of impartiality.

  9. #569
    Sage
    j-mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    30,272

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Actually, I've gotta disagree with both of you. I'd say that the SCOTUS stole the election and handed it to Bush.



    QFT. The Court split directly down the partisan fault line in that election, 5 right wingers for Bush four left wingers for Gore. It was scandalous from a rule of law standpoint. And the right-wing activist justices who stole the election even tacitly acknowledge what they were doing, and declared in dicta that the Bush v. Gore decision is not to be used as precedent in any future decision. There's a lot of dispute over whether or not they can even do that, and this dicta is itself a minor scandal, as a decision is necessarily precedent, and the Bush v. Gore decision has important ramifications in election law if it is considered to be precedent.

    Bush and Gore both had a right to argue their case, and the Court should have been a neutral arbiter of the law. It's a tragedy that the court is now more of a superlegislature that can't be counted on to serve its function without any degree of impartiality.

    One can only wonder Guy, if your feeling on the court would have been the same had Gore prevailed.

    Look, Gore v. Bush had to come to resolution, the Florida SC had screwed it up voting just as partisan as you say the SCOTUS did, only in Fl. the court's leaning is decidedly demo in make up.

    The fact that Gore lost was unacceptable to him so he tried what I suspect most demo's do today in the face of loss in close elections, and that is to contest strategically, and tamper with the vote to show them winning.

    j-mac
    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.

    Alexis de Tocqueville

  10. #570
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

    Re: Justices extend gun owner rights nationwide

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    One can only wonder Guy, if your feeling on the court would have been the same had Gore prevailed.
    One doesn't have to wonder, I'll tell one. If Gore had won I wouldn't feel this way because, the make up of the court being what it was, the evidence of partisanship wouldn't have been there. Likewise if even a single liberal justice had sided for Bush, then I wouldn't feel this way. Frankly, I haven't got a dog in that fight, it didn't matter to me one bit if Bush or Gore won (People forget back in those days the big criticism was that the two candidates were hardly any distinguishable). The scandal of Bush v. Gore has nothing to do with the parties and everything to do with the miscarriage of justice.

    Quote Originally Posted by j-mac View Post
    Look, Gore v. Bush had to come to resolution, the Florida SC had screwed it up voting just as partisan as you say the SCOTUS did, only in Fl. the court's leaning is decidedly demo in make up.
    Yeah, because we all know how liberal people are down in Florida...

Page 57 of 64 FirstFirst ... 7475556575859 ... 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
  •