Page 23 of 35 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 341

Thread: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

  1. #221
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,623

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Obscurity View Post
    Well, of course it's because of that. But additionally, I think full automatic weapons were not common use and are, in a country with this much division and violence, unusually dangerous.
    In Caetano v Massachusetts, SCOTUS suggested that a firearm with "hundreds of thousands" sold to the public qualify as "in common use". How many machine guns do you think are registered with the ATF under NFA 1934?
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  2. #222
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,623

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Obscurity View Post
    Your right to own unusually dangerous weapons is restricted. End of story. Or is the SCOTUS wrong here, too?
    The restrictions on RPG-7s don't concern me, nor do the non-restrictions on owning an APC. It's the current movements to restrict firearms "in common use for lawful purposes" that are not both "dangerous and unsual", which per Caetano is the criterion.


    There is no right you have to own an RPG-7 or an APC.
    The only reason we don't is because of laws like NFA 1934, which is blatantly unconstitutional on its face. I fear for more laws like that, mainly because we're seeing them now in various states.

    NFA also says I don't have a right to a shotgun with a 17.9" barrel Do you feel that's acceptable?
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  3. #223
    Sage
    ataraxia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    10,139

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    The word "need" doesn't appear any where in the Bill of Rights.

    Outlawing guns is unconstitutional. Confiscating private property without due process is unconstitutional.
    Deal with it.
    Who said anything about confiscating? The Reagan administration‘s ban on any further sales of new machine guns was a good model. The Trump administration’s van on the sale of bump stocks was another good example of how this works.

    If you think that Trump and Reagan administration‘s actions are unconstitutional, I would recommend bringing it up with the SCOTUS. Where is the outrage?

  4. #224
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    97,810

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by ataraxia View Post
    Who said anything about confiscating? The Reagan administration‘s ban on any further sales of new machine guns was a good model. The Trump administration’s van on the sale of bump stocks was another good example of how this works.

    If you think that Trump and Reagan administration‘s actions are unconstitutional, I would recommend bringing it up with the SCOTUS. Where is the outrage?
    Did you notice the thread title, or read the OP?
    Quote Originally Posted by HenryChinaski View Post
    You people are my problem. You’re a major component of what’s wrong with this country.
    It's more important to be morally right than factually correct - Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

  5. #225
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,623

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by ataraxia View Post
    Who said anything about confiscating? The Reagan administration‘s ban on any further sales of new machine guns was a good model.
    It wasn't the adminstration who passed the Hughes Amendment. Why was it a good idea?


    The Trump administration’s van on the sale of bump stocks was another good example of how this works.
    Why was the executive branch bypassing Congress to ban a device a good example of anything but executive branch overreach, especially given that the activity enabled by the bumpstock, bump firing, isn't illegal anywhere in the country?


    If you think that Trump and Reagan administration‘s actions are unconstitutional, I would recommend bringing it up with the SCOTUS. Where is the outrage?
    Well, let's just see what the new Court comes up with.
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  6. #226
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:23 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    3,202

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    I couldn't care less if you want me to do that-not going to happen.
    No link? LOL, Obviously I knew you had none, I set you up.

    and isn't it interesting about the "bad guy" in your story not having a gun?

    You lost big time in this exchange. By your own hand. LOL
    Trump is president because folks cant stand those they were brought up to look down on having passed them.

  7. #227
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    204,648

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by noonereal View Post
    No link? LOL, Obviously I knew you had none, I set you up.

    and isn't it interesting about the "bad guy" in your story not having a gun?

    You lost big time in this exchange. By your own hand. LOL
    How did I lose anything? I don't see anyone who actually has credibility on this subject making that claim. I had no idea if they were armed or not. I was jumped in an alley and hit in the face hard before I shot one of them. I wasn't even placed under arrest-that ought to tell you something
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Yeah; a shotgun IS a rifle; it uses a different load.
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    You know that Reagan signed the Brady Bill - right?
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    I'm smart on the gun issue and what we need to do about it.

  8. #228
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:34 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    204,648

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Obscurity View Post
    They weren't common use, and they were unusually dangerous, thus the amendment.
    what makes a select fire M4 unusually dangerous compared to a semi auto only one
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    Yeah; a shotgun IS a rifle; it uses a different load.
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    You know that Reagan signed the Brady Bill - right?
    Quote Originally Posted by jet57 View Post
    I'm smart on the gun issue and what we need to do about it.

  9. #229
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:21 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,623

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Obscurity View Post
    They weren't common use, and they were unusually dangerous, thus the amendment.
    The "in common use for lawful purposes" criterion didn't come into existence until 22 years after Hughes. What made it necessary to ban the sale of new legal machine guns, given the apparent success of NFA 1934 in keeping them from being used in criminal acts?
    Individuals can not be reasoned out of beliefs they were not reasoned into.

  10. #230
    Professor RaleBulgarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2018
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:34 PM
    Gender
    Posts
    2,100

    Re: Gun-seizure laws grow in popularity since Parkland shooting

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    State constitutions. City laws.
    States Constitutions authority is derived from and affirmed via the tenth Amendment. “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”. State laws/local municipalities draw their authority from the State’s Constitution, within parameters of the United States Constitution (with respect to the Supremacy Clause).

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    Red flag laws are preemptive on the possibility that someone might commit a crime.
    You’re correct. Temporarily removing firearms, pending a formal hearing, from an individual deemed by a judge to potentially be a hazard to him/herself is a preemptive measure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    Let's get back to your 14th Amendment claim:

    "The 7th Circuit Court's decision to uphold the District Court's dismissal in summary judgment was affirmed. A state or county agency does not have an obligation under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to prevent child abuse when the child is 1) in parental, not agency custody, and 2) the state did not create the danger of abuse or increase the child's vulnerability to abuse. Failure to prevent child abuse by a custodial parent does not violate the child's right to liberty for the purposes of the 14th Amendment.
    DeShaney v. Winnebago County, 489 U.S. 189 (1989), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on February 22, 1989. The court held that a state government agency's failure to prevent child abuse by a custodial parent does not violate the child's right to liberty for the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.".
    Speaking of preemptive ^^. Another case where the judge found that the police did not have a duty to preemptively act. Again, the judges decision was not related to a duty to protect at the time of need.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rucker61 View Post
    Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981) is an oft-quoted[2] District of Columbia Court of Appeals case that held that the police do not owe a specific duty to provide police services to citizens based on the public duty doctrine that the police cannot be held liable to failure to protect anyone.
    Not a Constitutional issue. Public duty doctrine is a personal injury law principle. PDD does not free police officers from their duty to protect citizens in need of their help.
    Ex; I’m being mugged and a cop happens on the scene. The officer is obligated to render assistance.

Page 23 of 35 FirstFirst ... 13212223242533 ... 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
  •