View Poll Results: Should you have purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

Voters
33. You may not vote on this poll
  • No (regardless of the right)

    32 96.97%
  • yes(it depends on the right)

    1 3.03%
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 100

Thread: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

  1. #71
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gibberish View Post
    Both have age restrictions. How is proving you are a specific age a "not inherent right" for one and a "prior restraint" of the other?
    Again:
    You have brought up the concept of licensing, and the seperate concept of background checks.

    Licensing is a precondition to the exercise of the right not inherent to same. This is an infringement. This differes from the precondition of voter registration because voter registration determines, most imnportantly, where your vote is to be cast, which IS an inherent part of the right to vote -- and so, is NOT an infringement.

    A secondary effect of voter registration is to determine the identity of the voter. This determines name, age, residency, etc -- all inherent parts of the right to vote, and therefore, not an infringement. This is the same as presenting an ID when buying a gun.

    Background checks create a form of prior restraint. This is an infringement. Prior restraint is the condition of the government preventing you from exercising your right on the basis that you MIGHT commit a crime if you were to be free to act -- your right is withheld 'just in case'. This is exactly what a background check does, 'just in case' you are a felon, etc.

    No one has ever argued that voter registration is prior restraint, becase, of its face, it is not.

  2. #72
    Sage
    Gibberish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,339

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Licensing is a precondition to the exercise of the right not inherent to same. This is an infringement. This differes from the precondition of voter registration because voter registration determines, most imnportantly, where your vote is to be cast, which IS an inherent part of the right to vote -- and so, is NOT an infringement.

    A secondary effect of voter registration is to determine the identity of the voter. This determines name, age, residency, etc -- all inherent parts of the right to vote, and therefore, not an infringement. This is the same as presenting an ID when buying a gun.
    If on a persons ID they were flagged as being a convicted criminal (for general purposes) and were denied the ability to purchase a gun by a gun seller, it would it be an infringement?


    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Background checks create a form of prior restraint. This is an infringement. Prior restraint is the condition of the government preventing you from exercising your right on the basis that you MIGHT commit a crime if you were to be free to act -- your right is withheld 'just in case'. This is exactly what a background check does, 'just in case' you are a felon, etc.
    Background check is not to check that you "might" commit a crime. It is to see that you you have not committed a crime in the past (removing your right to bare arms). It is a check to see 'just in case' it is illegal for you to own a gun.


    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    No one has ever argued that voter registration is prior restraint, becase, of its face, it is not.
    I have the right to vote as long as I meet specific requirements (age, registered in area, citizen, etc.). I am denied my right to vote until I can prove I meet these requirements.

    As someone purchasing a gun I must prove that I meet the requirements to the right to bear arms (age, citizen, not convicted criminal).

    How are those not the same prior-restraints?
    Last edited by Gibberish; 02-25-09 at 06:22 PM.
    "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."
    - Warren Buffett

  3. #73
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gibberish View Post
    How are those not the same prior-restraints?
    These things have been explained to you in the simplest terms possible.
    If you do not yet understand, there's nothing I can do for you.

  4. #74
    Sage
    Gibberish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,339

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    These things have been explained to you in the simplest terms possible.
    If you do not yet understand, there's nothing I can do for you.
    Both examples are requirements for you to qualify for the right. I don't know who much simpler it gets then that.

    Unless of course you believe someone underage or convicted criminals do have the right to bear arms?
    "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."
    - Warren Buffett

  5. #75
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    48,242

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    How does a convicted criminal not have the right to bear arms? Rights are innate and inalienable; of course they do. It's just that the State has used force to suppress the exercise of that right. On that note, I do believe that criminals should have the full of their rights recognized again once their punishment is done in full, meaning jail time, fines, probation, etc.
    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. #76
    Global Moderator
    Engagement!
    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    43,948

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    Wait, I thought it was pretty much conservative dogma that constitutional rights only applied to the individual as it relates to federal law, not state law.
    And we see once again that you either have a completely misinformed, unrealistically stereotyped version of Conservatism in your head or you're just being intentionally dense.

    Conservative dogma states that constitutional rights apply to the individual and can not be infringed upon by the state of the federal government. Yes, the federal government can't ban guns, neither should a state, because its garaunteed in the 2nd amendment. The Federal Government shouldn't put a law in place criminalizing complaining about the president, nor should the states do such for criticizing governors as its protected under the 1st amendment.

    Conservative dogma has issue when the federal government legislates or rules on matters that are not innumerated within the Constitution and as such belong to the STATES, not the federal government.
    You down with TPP?

  7. #77
    Tavern Bartender
    #neverhillary
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    68,030

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by WI Crippler View Post
    Well thats dumb.

    I wonder if they are going to require that insurance companies come up with a "gun owners" liability insurance program. Your homeowners insurance already covers you for any liability for anything that happens on your property, but rarely do people carry 1 million in coverage, unless they have an umbrella policy. I can't imagine too many insurance companies would be wanting to cover "gunfire" insurance, for wherever you may go. Thats just going to give people deeper pockets to go after, if they get shot. Thus increasing the cost of said insurance over time.
    Cool we need to make law enforcement and military personnel purchase malpractice insurance, since they are more likely to shoot someone.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)

  8. #78
    Sage
    Gibberish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,339

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ikari View Post
    How does a convicted criminal not have the right to bear arms? Rights are innate and inalienable; of course they do. It's just that the State has used force to suppress the exercise of that right. On that note, I do believe that criminals should have the full of their rights recognized again once their punishment is done in full, meaning jail time, fines, probation, etc.
    So should we police the criminals right to purchase weapons?

    If so, how do you do that without forcing everyone to pass a background check?
    "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."
    - Warren Buffett

  9. #79
    Sage
    Infinite Chaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:14 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,358

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gibberish View Post
    -- Personally though, I don't mind proving that I am eligible for the right if it helps remove the ability to get easily get gun for those illegal to posses guns --
    Just speaking as an outsider, in the UK gun ownership has become incredibly restricted. You need licences, you need to demonstrate that you can keep the weapons you have secure from theft and misuse and you are subject to all kinds of background security checks.

    However gun ownership among criminals is probably as high now as it was when gun ownership was more widespread. Restrictions only stop those who would and could legally own a gun, it does not stop the criminal in any serious way, shape or form.

  10. #80
    Sage
    Gibberish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    6,339

    Re: Should you have to purchase insurance to exercise constitutional rights?

    Quote Originally Posted by Infinite Chaos View Post
    Just speaking as an outsider, in the UK gun ownership has become incredibly restricted. You need licences, you need to demonstrate that you can keep the weapons you have secure from theft and misuse and you are subject to all kinds of background security checks.

    However gun ownership among criminals is probably as high now as it was when gun ownership was more widespread. Restrictions only stop those who would and could legally own a gun, it does not stop the criminal in any serious way, shape or form.
    Good point. If they are criminals then they are most likely have no problems getting a gun in an illegal way. If that stat is true in the US then my concern of wanting to checks in place for the purpose of disallowing criminals from easily purchasing weapons is invalid.

    I say screw guns all together. Let's go back to swords and knives and fight it out medieval style.
    "Gold gets dug out of the ground in Africa, or someplace. Then we melt it down, dig another hole, bury it again and pay people to stand around guarding it. It has no utility. Anyone watching from Mars would be scratching their head."
    - Warren Buffett

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 678910 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
  •