View Poll Results: Do you agree with the premise stated in the OP?

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I agree. because...

    5 50.00%
  • No, I disagree, because...

    3 30.00%
  • Other (explain)

    2 20.00%
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 83

Thread: Constitutional restrictions on gunsd?

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

    Arrow Re: Constitutional restrictions on guns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Given the topic (Constitutional restrictions on guns), there's no need to consider cannon-armed merchentmen.
    Of course there is.

    Quote Originally Posted by stevenb View Post
    The definition of arms is pretty clearly what the "soldier" back then could carry... translated into what the soldier today could carry.
    This notion flies in the face of the facts in Boston Harbor in 1789, and thus needs to be challenged as untrue, or an old wives tale.

    When the Founders allowed private ownership of Military Grade Vessels and Arms, and we all know it, then there is obviously no line to be drawn with regards to whether a soldier can carry something or not.

  2. #72
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on guns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    Of course there is.
    You can, but you'd go off topic. I'm kinda hoping that doesnt happen any more than it already has.

  3. #73
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on gunsd?

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    Having a discussion on Constitutional Law is difficult because most people do not understand the analysis that goes into it.

    Constitutional Rights are not 100% absolute. The way the analysis works is that any limitation/restriction placed upon a right undergoes analysis by the court.

    The level of "justification" that the government must show for the restriction will vary according to the level of right involved and the classification of the people the restriction is placed on.

    When dealing with enumerated Constitutional rights, any restriction placed upon them will be stricken as "unconstitutional" Unless the government can support the restriction with a "compelling state interest".

    Things such as "licenses" are most likely not unconstitutional because there is a compelling state interest in record keeping and knowing who has guns.

    Things such as bans on felons having guns, probably not unconstitutional because the state has a compelling interest in reducing crime by keeping guns away from known criminals.

    Other restrictions will fall within the gray areas....flat out bans would violate the Constitution.
    Good post... except.

    You wrote:

    "Things such as "licenses" are most likely not unconstitutional because there is a compelling state interest in record keeping and knowing who has guns."

    Exactly why would the Government need to know who owns what? They don't now and have no need to in the future.... unless they want a list so they can confiscate them.

    Also, I think it would be an "infringement" as I would need the Governments permission to own a gun.... that would violate my second amendment rights.

  4. #74
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,606

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on gunsd?

    Also, there being a "compelling state interest" is not enough. The restriction implemented must be the least possible restriction to accomplish the state interest, and only that interest.

    But the government knowing who has guns is not a compelling state interest, any more than the government knowing who has a computer would be.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  5. #75
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:24 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,606

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on gunsd?

    Quote Originally Posted by Crunch View Post
    Also, I think it would be an "infringement" as I would need the Governments permission to own a gun.... that would violate my second amendment rights.
    Yes. Any prior restraint is inherently an infringement. That, too, is settled Constitutional law -- apart from just being obvious.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #76
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on gunsd?

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    You're missing the point Ikari....you are asking me to take at a minimum, a one year law school course, and reduce it to a paragraph post.
    Just like I would never expect to learn how to plumb a house in a one paragraph post, I certainly would never expect anyone to understand Constitutional analysis in one.

    As far as your second contention. The way our government was set up was for there to be three distinct branches of government, each with checks and balances. The SCOTUS has exactly the level of power that was intended at the inception of our system.
    Then do us all a favor and go somewhere else, so we can have a discussion about a very simple right... the right to keep and bear arms without Government infringement.

    BTW… the constitution is very simple and anyone with a GED can read it and understand it… it only gets complicated when the SC and lawyers get involved to distort what was written for their own dishonest purposes.

  7. #77
    Professor
    other's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    VA
    Last Seen
    01-22-14 @ 11:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,473

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on gunsd?

    Quote Originally Posted by disneydude View Post
    [...] The SCOTUS has exactly the level of power that was intended at the inception of our system.
    No. Judicial review was implemented after the inception (and not through any amendment process). Its power was expanded after the initial ratification/implementation under chief justice marshal.

    Madison himself, the "father of the constitution" even switched over to the anti-federalist side once he realized how the document could be abused under a loose interpretation and used to grotesquely expand federal power, which he adamantly opposed.

    (I guarantee that if judicial review would have been initially stated in section III, very few, if any, states would have ratified it)
    Last edited by other; 09-03-09 at 06:29 PM.

  8. #78
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on guns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    How are you defining "arms"?



    Well, obviously the use of ANY kind of weapon is a "clear and present danger." I think possession might or might not be...depending on the type of weapon. Surely the really heavy stuff like bombs, grenade launchers, etc. would be a clear and present danger, since they have no legitimate purpose and can cause mass destruction at any moment. The same is somewhat true (to a lesser extent) for certain types of guns...it's just a question of where you draw the line.



    I'm just saying that each right is different. Traditionally the courts have been more lenient with certain rights than others, so I don't think just substituting the restrictions on free speech for the restrictions on arms would fly in a court of law.
    You are missing to whole point of the 2nd amendment... it is not for hunting or target practice.... it is for the citizens of this country to protect themselves from an abusive Government, so it only follows that as citizens, we have the right to arm ourselves as the Government does.

  9. #79
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on guns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Given the topic (Constitutional restrictions on guns), there's no need to consider cannon-armed merchentmen.
    I thought we were talking about the 2nd ammendment... "to keep and bear arms"

  10. #80
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Constitutional restrictions on guns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Crunch View Post
    I thought we were talking about the 2nd ammendment... "to keep and bear arms"
    See: Topic header

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6789 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
  •