• 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!

Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons'...

Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

Opopanax said:
As someone who has studied Constitutional law for going on two straight years now, and as someone who has argued its principals in front of real judges in real competitions, and who will actually have to deal with it in practice, I assure you that what you know about how the Constitution works is utterly bereft of any meaningful insight. I used to think that because of what I know that I could educate others on it, and I would put forth real effort to address real questions, and then put them into a condensed form that would make sense to laypeople. But I found that it was almost always a complete waste of time because the people I addressed either wouldn't read, wouldn't respond, or would completely ignore what I wrote and continue on their tangent. So unless I have the time, which I especially don't right now, I don't bother anymore.

So go ahead and believe what you want. I have no duty to keep flipping a switch in the hopes of turning on a dead lightbulb.
Click to expand...

Except you were taught in liberal schools and worked with liberal judges, yes there all pretty much liberals these days, the true FF Historical meaning have long since been abandoned by liberals that want to change america into their idea of utopia. Most of these people loath the constitution. Sorry but the commerce clause was NEVER intended to grant the Federal government the power to regulate guns. If that had been their intent they would have enumerated that power.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

CrabCake said:
It literally is. That's not my opinion, it is a fact.
Logical Fallacies» Slippery Slope Fallacy
Logical Fallacies

Facts are facts whether you like them or not. It is a fact that slippery slope arguments are fallacious (illogical), like it or not.
Click to expand...

There is no error in my reasoning, or that of other Conservatives or Libertarians on this board. The error in reasoning solely originates in the denial by liberals.

Nearly every liberal Democrat is anti-gun and would like to see all guns banned from society.
If you can't or won't except that......I pity you.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

Opopanax said:
As someone who has studied Constitutional law for going on two straight years now, and as someone who has argued its principals in front of real judges in real competitions, and who will actually have to deal with it in practice, I assure you that what you know about how the Constitution works is utterly bereft of any meaningful insight. I used to think that because of what I know that I could educate others on it, and I would put forth real effort to address real questions, and then put them into a condensed form that would make sense to laypeople. But I found that it was almost always a complete waste of time because the people I addressed either wouldn't read, wouldn't respond, or would completely ignore what I wrote and continue on their tangent. So unless I have the time, which I especially don't right now, I don't bother anymore.

So go ahead and believe what you want. I have no duty to keep flipping a switch in the hopes of turning on a dead lightbulb.
Click to expand...

Very well said.

The Second Amendment was never a restriction at all on the Federal Government's powers of prohibition except in relation to militias until the Heller case in 2008 which ruled for the first time on the individual right, and in doing so limited federal powers but did not come close to creating a blanket prohibition. It is generally thought, for example, that Congress could still Constitutionally ban semi assault rifles.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
Very well said.

The Second Amendment was never a restriction at all on the Federal Government's powers of prohibition except in relation to militias until the Heller case in 2008 which ruled for the first time on the individual right, and in doing so limited federal powers but did not come close to creating a blanket prohibition. It is generally thought, for example, that Congress could still Constitutionally ban semi assault rifles.
Click to expand...

Utter BS, it ALWAYS granted the right against infringement to the PEOPLE. If it meant milita, it would have said militia not people.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
Very well said.

The Second Amendment was never a restriction at all on the Federal Government's powers of prohibition except in relation to militias until the Heller case in 2008 which ruled for the first time on the individual right, and in doing so limited federal powers but did not come close to creating a blanket prohibition. It is generally thought, for example, that Congress could still Constitutionally ban semi assault rifles.
Click to expand...

The commerce clause was never intended to grant the Federal government the power to regulate guns. If that had been their intent they would have enumerated that power.
They finally got it right, in Heller.

All 10 of the Bill of Rights, deal with the rights of the "people" and the desires and fantasies of the Utopians....be damned!
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

blaxshep said:
Utter BS, it ALWAYS granted the right against infringement to the PEOPLE. If it meant milita, it would have said militia not people.
Click to expand...

Yes indeed and W/O a doubt!
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

blaxshep said:
Utter BS, it ALWAYS granted the right against infringement to the PEOPLE. If it meant milita, it would have said militia not people.
Click to expand...


Unread laymen shouldn't argue Constitutional law if they care about not appearing stupid. The individual right is not a matter of your opinion or mine about what the language of The Second Amendment means. The meaning insofar as the individual right is concerned was an undecided question in the law until Heller. Do yourself a favor and at least look it up in Wiki.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

MickeyW said:
The commerce clause was never intended to grant the Federal government the power to regulate guns. If that had been their intent they would have enumerated that power.
They finally got it right, in Heller.

All 10 of the Bill of Rights, deal with the rights of the "people" and the desires and fantasies of the Utopians....be damned!
Click to expand...

The question was not to powers granted under the Commerce Clause but to the meaning of The Second Amendment as it relates to an individual right. Since Heller it is pointless to argue the Commerce Clause because the case holds that certain prohibitions are lawful.

Here is the pertinent language:


"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.."
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
And as if arming the bodyguards of Presidential candidates has the slightest bearing on her gun control policies. But when Trump says it a True Believers' chorus of "Oh, yeah" resonates across the land.
Click to expand...

why is it Jack, that almost every anti gun poster on this board is

1) a liberal, progressive, socialist etc

2) is going to vote for Hillary or against Trump

if gun control really was a valid form of crime control, you'd think conservatives who don't own guns would engage in some support of those schemes. They don't.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
Unread laymen shouldn't argue Constitutional law if they care about not appearing stupid. The individual right is not a matter of your opinion or mine about what the language of The Second Amendment means. The meaning insofar as the individual right is concerned was an undecided question in the law until Heller. Do yourself a favor and at least look it up in Wiki.
Click to expand...

Utter BS, the Constitution was written in a language anyone can understand not lawyers that twist the meanings. The 2nd is quite clear any and all gun control laws are an infringement and unconstitutional. Period. Don't like it pass an Amendment.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
The question was not to powers granted under the Commerce Clause but to the meaning of The Second Amendment as it relates to an individual right. Since Heller it is pointless to argue the Commerce Clause because the case holds that certain prohibitions are lawful.

Here is the pertinent language:


"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.."
Click to expand...

Unlimited right to keep and bare is not an unlimited right to discharge or kill, there are plenty of laws against criminal use. The only thing gun control does is violate innocent people from their right to defend themselves.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

blaxshep said:
Utter BS, the Constitution was written in a language anyone can understand not lawyers that twist the meanings. The 2nd is quite clear any and all gun control laws are an infringement and unconstitutional. Period. Don't like it pass an Amendment.
Click to expand...

So a law that spefically prohibited psychopaths from owning, say, machine guns, would be unconstitutional?
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
Very well said.

The Second Amendment was never a restriction at all on the Federal Government's powers of prohibition except in relation to militias until the Heller case in 2008 which ruled for the first time on the individual right, and in doing so limited federal powers but did not come close to creating a blanket prohibition. It is generally thought, for example, that Congress could still Constitutionally ban semi assault rifles.
Click to expand...
You need to read the bill of rights preamble so it can prove you wrong
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

TurtleDude said:
why is it Jack, that almost every anti gun poster on this board is

1) a liberal, progressive, socialist etc

2) is going to vote for Hillary or against Trump

if gun control really was a valid form of crime control, you'd think conservatives who don't own guns would engage in some support of those schemes. They don't.
Click to expand...

It's more a question of public safety than crime control. I don't know why conservatives on this board are out of step with the majority of Americans who favor modest gun control measures.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
It's more a question of public safety than crime control. I don't know why conservatives on this board are out of step with the majority of Americans who favor modest gun control measures.
Click to expand...

no its not.

what is a "modest" gun control measure?

liberals were responsible for the hughes amendment which prohibited people from owning (after draconian registration steps) machine guns made after May 19, 1986 and yet in 80 years, there are no cases of private citizens using a legally owned MG to commit murder
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

Tanngrisnir said:
So a law that spefically prohibited psychopaths from owning, say, machine guns, would be unconstitutional?
Click to expand...

at a federal level-yes

at a state level no-assuming someone is found to be a psychopath through due process of law
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

blaxshep said:
Unlimited right to keep and bare is not an unlimited right to discharge or kill, there are plenty of laws against criminal use. The only thing gun control does is violate innocent people from their right to defend themselves.
Click to expand...

Yep!

JackA said:
It's more a question of public safety than crime control. I don't know why conservatives on this board are out of step with the majority of Americans who favor modest gun control measures.
Click to expand...

Public Safety is an absolute Sham by the Left! Gun control has nothing to do with public safety, only Control of the populace.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
It's more a question of public safety than crime control. I don't know why conservatives on this board are out of step with the majority of Americans who favor modest gun control measures.
Click to expand...

"Modest gun control measures" are not in the vocabulary of a liberal. They want draconian gun control measures, or incremental steps toward that end.
We already have too many gun laws on the books now.......and all they do is penalize the law abiding gun owner and do nothing to stop crime.
Every Lefty who suggests gun control measures, is either delusional or an anti-gun ...................bastard!
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

TurtleDude said:
no its not.

what is a "modest" gun control measure?

liberals were responsible for the hughes amendment which prohibited people from owning (after draconian registration steps) machine guns made after May 19, 1986 and yet in 80 years, there are no cases of private citizens using a legally owned MG to commit murder
Click to expand...

Yes, it is, if by crime control you mean keeping arms away from criminals, which I agree will never happen.

See the paragraph I quoted from the holding in Scalia's opinion for examples of "modest" measures. Others would include background checks, semi assault weapon bans, required training prior to purchase as required in Connecticut, one of the lowest per capita gun violence states. There are others.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

TurtleDude said:
at a federal level-yes

at a state level no-assuming someone is found to be a psychopath through due process of law
Click to expand...

There already is a federal law banning the sale of machine guns, and not just to psychopaths. Someone has over fed you on the Commerce Clause.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

Master PO said:
You need to read the bill of rights preamble so it can prove you wrong
Click to expand...

Another arm chair legal scholar. Take it up with Scalia when you get there. Until then read his damn opinion.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
Another arm chair legal scholar. Take it up with Scalia when you get there. Until then read his damn opinion.
Click to expand...
you said there are no restrictions ,and you are wrong becauses it plainly says the 2nd is a restrction, so go ahead and lie to yourself
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
Yes, it is, if by crime control you mean keeping arms away from criminals, which I agree will never happen.

See the paragraph I quoted from the holding in Scalia's opinion for examples of "modest" measures. Others would include background checks, semi assault weapon bans, required training prior to purchase as required in Connecticut, one of the lowest per capita gun violence states. There are others.
Click to expand...

semi auto bans is extremist unconstitutional garbage. its a non starter as is training requirements.
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
Another arm chair legal scholar. Take it up with Scalia when you get there. Until then read his damn opinion.
Click to expand...

scalia didn't support gun bans. Didn't support training requirements and the only reason why he "supported" the federal ban on felons was because he was a "faint hearted" originalist who was afraid to reverse what he considered was relied upon but unconstitutional expansions of the commerce clause. he knew that the commerce clause was a false source of gun control power but it has been used by crap like social security and other laws that clearly congress was not supposed to have

and I am no arm chair legal scholar. and unlike you, I have the benefit of having at least 6 supreme court clerks as among my closest friends and two of them clerked for Scalia as did a former colleague of mine who I constantly discussed Scalia's "originalism".

stuff you call for violates the constitution. Most handguns sold today are semi auto and that has been the case for 40 years now. Yet you want to ban them shows you are an extremist. anything civilian police officers use are neither unusually dangerous nor uncommon
 
Re: Trump slams Clinton gun control policies: 'Her bodyguards should drop all weapons

JackA said:
There already is a federal law banning the sale of machine guns, and not just to psychopaths. Someone has over fed you on the Commerce Clause.
Click to expand...

that proves my point. The hughes amendment was not properly passed It was introduced by asshole Bill Hughes in a spiteful attempt to derail a pro gun bill to which it was improperly attached

IN 80 YEARS THERE HAS NOT BEEN A SINGLE CASE of a private citizen using a legally owned MG to commit murder or attempted murder

tell us why banning such guns (made after May 19, 1986) was a crime control measure?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom