• 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!

'He's lucky to be alive still, to be honest,' says Springfield Police Lieutenant Mike Lucas

Chaddelamancha said:
Because we are in a heighten state with all of these shootings. You can bear arms, just be smart about it.
Click to expand...

does one have to be smart to exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms?
never saw such language within the second amendment
you are imposing an expectation that does not exist
 
vegas giants said:
Police have to maintain order. If your actions have a potential for violence they will make you leave the scene
Click to expand...

any person publicly bearing arms presents a potential for violence
what causes this instance to warrant the deprivation of that man's Constitutionally protected right to carry?
 
justabubba said:
does one have to be smart to exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms?
never saw such language within the second amendment
you are imposing an expectation that does not exist
Click to expand...

One can not present an unreasonable potential for danger to the public
 
justabubba said:
any person publicly bearing arms presents a potential for violence
what causes this instance to warrant the deprivation of that man's Constitutionally protected right to carry?
Click to expand...

Recent mass shooting in a Walmart.


That's enough
 
vegas giants said:
One can not present an unreasonable potential for danger to the public
Click to expand...

in every instance where a person publicly bears arms there is a potential danger to the public

what makes this encounter so unique that it authorizes the suspension of the man's Constitutionally protected right to bear arms?
 
justabubba said:
in every instance where a person publicly bears arms there is a potential danger to the public

what makes this encounter so unique that it authorizes the suspension of the man's Constitutionally protected right to bear arms?
Click to expand...

Recent mass shooting in similar environment.


He can sue....but he wont win
 
vegas giants said:
Recent mass shooting in a Walmart.


That's enough
Click to expand...

recent shooting somewhere distant from the place of this carry authorizes a suspension of one's Constitutional right to bear arms? i don't think so
but you can point me to the passage within the Constitution which tells us so
 
justabubba said:
recent shooting somewhere distant from the place of this carry authorizes a suspension of one's Constitutional right to bear arms? i don't think so
but you can point me to the passage within the Constitution which tells us so
Click to expand...

Every right has restrictions. Let him sue. The court will rule the state has a compelling interest to protect the public.


See strict scrutiny
 
justabubba said:
does one have to be smart to exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms?
never saw such language within the second amendment
you are imposing an expectation that does not exist
Click to expand...

You don't have to be smart. But usually when someone isn't smart when it comes to guns, someone gets shot. :shrug:
 
vegas giants said:
Recent mass shooting in similar environment.


He can sue....but he wont win
Click to expand...

where does the Constitution tell us it is acceptable for law enforcement to infringe on our Constitutionally protect right to bear arms if there was a recent shooting in a location distant from our present carry?
and how much time must pass until our Constitutional right to bear arms is no longer suspended after such mass shooting?
and how far distant must the mass shooting have been from the present site for that to legally infringe upon our Constitutional right to bear arms?
 
vegas giants said:
Every right has restrictions. Let him sue. The court will rule the state has a compelling interest to protect the public.


See strict scrutiny
Click to expand...

identify the restrictions that can be imposed upon a Constitutional right to bear arms, which right CANNOT BE INFRINGED

i look forward to this answer
 
justabubba said:
where does the Constitution tell us it is acceptable for law enforcement to infringe on our Constitutionally protect right to bear arms if there was a recent shooting in a location distant from our present carry?
and how much time must pass until our Constitutional right to bear arms is no longer suspended after such mass shooting?
and how far distant must the mass shooting have been from the present site for that to legally infringe upon our Constitutional right to bear arms?
Click to expand...

The standard is did the police have a reasonable expectation that this case was a potential for violence.


Any judge will say yes they did
 
justabubba said:
identify the restrictions that can be imposed upon a Constitutional right to bear arms, which right CANNOT BE INFRINGED

i look forward to this answer
Click to expand...

There are lots of them. Scotus rulings
 
justabubba said:
identify the restrictions that can be imposed upon a Constitutional right to bear arms, which right CANNOT BE INFRINGED

i look forward to this answer
Click to expand...

You can start with heller....there are lots more
 
Chaddelamancha said:
You don't have to be smart. But usually when someone isn't smart when it comes to guns, someone gets shot. :shrug:
Click to expand...

then your position is it is legally acceptable to shoot those who are stupid and bear arms even if they presented no threat to the public while carrying arms
interesting take on the provisions of the US Constitution
gotta cite?
 
justabubba said:
Dmitriy Andreychenko Arrested At Springfield, Missouri Walmart Wearing Body Armor, Carrying Assault Rifle



what was the problem with this adult bearing arms in public, such that the police spokesman stated that he was lucky to still be alive for publicly bearing arms

all of you second amendment defenders, did this fellow do anything other than exercise his Constitutional right to bear arms?
Click to expand...

Anyone deceiving cops into thinking they are armed and a threat to innocent people could easily be shot first and questioned afterward. It is long-standing American common sense tradition.
 
vegas giants said:
The standard is did the police have a reasonable expectation that this case was a potential for violence.


Any judge will say yes they did
Click to expand...

what about that circumstance gave the police authority to infringe on the second amendment rights of that man

i look forward to that answer
 
justabubba said:
what about that circumstance gave the police authority to infringe on the second amendment rights of that man

i look forward to that answer
Click to expand...

They felt he was potentially a threat to the public
 
vegas giants said:
You can start with heller....there are lots more
Click to expand...

point out where heller tells us this man's right to bear arms could be suspended by law enforcement
 
marke said:
Anyone deceiving cops into thinking they are armed and a threat to innocent people could easily be shot first and questioned afterward. It is long-standing American common sense tradition.
Click to expand...

then your position is the cops have authority to deprive one of one's Constitutional right to bear arms if they insist a threat existed where the threat was not actually posed
glad you are on record of saying the law enforcement community has the authority to deprive citizens of their Constitutional rights
did you also get that from the Bible?
 
justabubba said:
then your position is the cops have authority to deprive one of one's Constitutional right to bear arms if they insist a threat existed where the threat was not actually posed
glad you are on record of saying the law enforcement community has the authority to deprive citizens of their Constitutional rights
did you also get that from the Bible?
Click to expand...

Strict scrutiny
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom