View Poll Results: See OP for 2-pat question

Voters
22. You may not vote on this poll
  • The court will hear the case (or one like it)

    11 50.00%
  • The court will NOT hear the case (or one like it)

    1 4.55%
  • The court will incorporate the 2nd against the states

    8 36.36%
  • The court will NOT incorporate the 2nd against the states

    4 18.18%
  • Other

    2 9.09%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 164

Thread: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

  1. #11
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,225

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by WI Crippler View Post

    Once you get into regulations, I can agree, defining "the line" there can get murky. I can support background checks, but I can't support you having to have the ammunition stored 100 ft away, with a trigger lock and the bolt assembly removed.
    I would not support that either.
    Last edited by winston53660; 06-03-09 at 02:26 PM.

  2. #12
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Rights are limited be it free speech that harms others or vehicles that can harm others and these rights also includes the right to bear arms..
    Sure -- thats why certain actions - yelling fire in a theater, firing a gun into the air while in a city - can be prohibited without running afoul of the protection of the bill of rights. These actions directly endanger others and so lie outside the right protected by the relevant amendments.

    And you have to agree the purpose of firearms is to cause damage to others unlike a steak knife
    Sure -- the entire reason we have a 2nd amendment is that sometimes people need to kill other people.
    But, at this juncture, that's irrelevant.
    Last edited by Goobieman; 06-03-09 at 02:35 PM.

  3. #13
    Sage
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    08-27-09 @ 06:41 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    6,344

    Re: Will the SCoTUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Yes I do and I think they will rule that owning firearms is a right. Just like free speech is.
    They've already ruled on that....that was the substance of Heller.

    With Heller already on the books, I can't see how the Supreme Court wouldn't overturn both Maloney (2nd Circuit) and National Rifle Association (9th Circuit), and affirm Nordyke, (7th Circuit).

  4. #14
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,225

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post

    Sure -- the entire reason we have a 2nd amendment is that sometimes people need to kill other people.
    Well that is an awfully simplified view just because you want to have your guns. I find it a bit more complex like the right to free speech.

  5. #15
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Well that is an awfully simplified view just because you want to have your guns.
    Boiled down, that's what it is.
    Am I wrong? If so, how?

  6. #16
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,225

    Re: Will the SCoTUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by celticlord View Post
    They've already ruled on that....that was the substance of Heller.

    With Heller already on the books, I can't see how the Supreme Court wouldn't overturn both Maloney (2nd Circuit) and National Rifle Association (9th Circuit), and affirm Nordyke, (7th Circuit).
    Great good I think this Chicago tribunal will be turned over.

  7. #17
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:21 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,225

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Boiled down, that's what it is.
    Am I wrong? If so, how?
    Goobieman you are missing my points they went right over your head. You are not wrong you are not right IMHO. IMHO there are shades of gray.

    For the record though I do think citizens of the USA have the right to own firearms. I also think every firearm should have a serial number, be registered and licensed. Not unlike a car is.

  8. #18
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 12:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Goobieman you are missing my points they went right over your head. You are not wrong you are not right IMHO. IMHO there are shades of gray.
    You seemed to take exception to my statement.
    If you dont agree with it, tell me why.

    I also think every firearm should have a serial number, be registered and licensed. Not unlike a car is.
    I have little issue with guns beng treated like Ohio treats cars:

    -You dont need a license to buy a car
    -You dont need a license to own a car
    -You dont need a license to keep/posess/store/transport a car on private property
    -You dont need a license to operate a car on private propoerty
    -You dont need a license to trasnport your car in public property
    -You dont need to register a car that you buy
    -You dont need to register a car that you own
    -You dont need to register a car keep/posess/store/transport it on private property
    -You dont need to register a car to operate it on private propoerty
    -You dont need to register a car to transport it on public property.
    -The ONLY time you need a license is to operate a car on public property
    -The ONLY time you need to register a car is to operate it on public property

    To treat guns like cars, change the word "car" to "gun" in all of the above.

    Last edited by Goobieman; 06-03-09 at 03:31 PM.

  9. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Last Seen
    09-22-10 @ 02:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    11,430

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    Quote Originally Posted by winston53660 View Post
    Well that is an awfully simplified view just because you want to have your guns. I find it a bit more complex like the right to free speech.
    Actually, it's a concise and accurate view.

    The purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure the people have the guns they need to hurt anyone seeking to be their tyrant.

  10. #20
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 10:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Will the SCotUS incorporate the 2nd amendement against the states?

    FN 23 of Heller:

    With respect to Cruikshank’s continuing validity on incorporation, a question not presented by this case, we note that Cruikshank also said that the First Amendment did not apply against the States and did not engage in the sort of Fourteenth Amendment inquiry required by our later cases. Our later decisions in Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, 265 (1886) and Miller v. Texas, 153 U. S. 535, 538 (1894), reaffirmed that the Second Amendment applies only to the Federal Government.
    Still not sure what this FN is trying to say, but I'm reasonably sure that it's important.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Actually, it's a concise and accurate view.

    The purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure the people have the guns they need to hurt anyone seeking to be their tyrant.
    Alternatively (and more accurately), you could say that the purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that the people (read: states) could protect themselves from a tyrannical federal government.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

Page 2 of 17 FirstFirst 123412 ... 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
  •