The Republican Primaries

The Batlord · 11-01-2015, 11:02 PM

Are we talking about the 2nd Amendment now?

Chula Vista · 11-01-2015, 11:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

Are we talking about the 2nd Amendment now?

JWB: Tomorrow when my head is clear.

Bat: The topic de jour is fruitcakes. Enlighten us master...

The Batlord · 11-01-2015, 11:24 PM

I was just making fun of you for whatever it is that I can currently find to mock you for.

*shrug*

~~John Wilkes Booth~~ · 11-01-2015, 11:25 PM

good post batlord

so i read the synopsis and it does sound interesting, however i think it's a dead end tbh. this is just based on an exchange i was reading on people commenting on this author.

Quote:

It seems the newest mantra of the Gun Control Zealots is that the 2A is/was misinterpreted by the Heller decision, and somehow overturned some 200+ years of precedent. Somehow, it is all about a militia, and nothing to do with arms. Yet, when asked, not a single person, some claiming to be Constitutional scholars, have ever managed to cite the Supreme Court precedent, or the writings and/or quotes of any of the founders who claimed such a silly thing. The fact is, as can be seen by the Dred Scott decision, the 2A has ALWAYS been thought of as an individual right.

From DRED SCOTT v. SANDFORD, 60 U.S. 393 (1856) 60 U.S. 393 (How.)

"It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to KEEP AND CARRY ARMS WHEREVER THEY WENT. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State."
So, if anyone can name the court case, or the writing of a founder who claimed that arms were only for the militia, please, post it.

Quote:

Summary of various court decisions concerning gun rights

DECISIONS THAT EXPLICITLY RECOGNIZED THAT THE SECOND AMENDMENT GUARANTEES AN INDIVIDUAL RIGHT TO PURCHASE, POSSESS OR CARRY FIREARMS, AND IT LIMITS THE AUTHORITY OF BOTH FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS:

· U.S. vs. Emerson, 5 Fed (1999), confirmed an individual right requiring compelling government interest for regulation.

· Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243, 250, 251 (1846) (struck down a ban on sale of small, easily concealed handguns as violating Second Amendment);

· State v. Chandler, 5 La.An. 489, 490, 491 (1850) (upheld a ban on concealed carry, but acknowledged that open carry was protected by Second Amendment);

· Smith v. State, 11 La.An. 633, 634 (1856) (upheld a ban on concealed carry, but recognized as protected by Second Amendment "arms there spoken of are such as are borne by a people in war, or at least carried openly");

Quote:

It's called "whistling past the graveyard".

The "collective right" model has been debunked and appropriately trashed. Progressives simply reject the tenet that all things (families, communities, states and countries) begin with the individual. It is the individual in which all rights and powers reside. Communities, states and countries only have the power delegated to them by individuals to use in their behalf. Progressives reject that self-evident truth because it is an immovable obstruction to their view of governments doing what they believe is best for the people, whether the people agree with it or not.

it doesn't make sense to have a fundamental inalienable right only apply to people who are part of a militia. the fact that it's in the bill of rights makes it pretty clear that it is a right that applies to american citizens in general, imo. it would be very silly for them to put as the 2nd ****ing thing on the list something that only applies to certain clubs.

Chula Vista · 11-02-2015, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth

it doesn't make sense to have a fundamental inalienable right only apply to people who are part of a militia. the fact that it's in the bill of rights makes it pretty clear that it is a right that applies to american citizens in general, imo. it would be very silly for them to put as the 2nd ****ing thing on the list something that only applies to certain clubs.

No one is arguing that people should not be able to own guns. It's all about regulation. Up until this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distri...mbia_v._Heller

reasonable regulations were being enacted all the time to keep up with the times. For example, it's illegal to own a sawed off shotgun or a fully automatic weapon. After the Heller case the NRA and it's pit bull, the gun lobby, got empowered and went after ANY sort of regulation as being the first step towards "the gubment gonna take away your guns man"!

Now it's down to the state level. Some states like Cali continue to enact reasonable regulations. I own a Glock but can not open carry it, can not carry it concealed (unless I can provide a valid reason - if I was a cash courier I could) and can not own a silencer or a clip that holds more than 10 rounds.

Other states like AZ or CO are the ****ing wild wild west. This picture cracks me up.

Have you seen this?

Gun folks want to stand behind the 2ND like it prohibits any sort of legal intervention of any kind whatsoever. That's not how it's written.

William_the_Bloody · 11-08-2015, 02:58 PM

Uhg! I can only support a candidate on their anti free trade policies for so long, but I can't stomach it anymore, he's becoming a comical parody.

I keep thinking he's going to fade once things get serious, but the problem is his cut throat business strategy of demolishing his competition has been very effective so far.

He's completely crushed the Bush campaign, and now he's doing the same thing to Carson.

Marco Rubio was looking like a good establishment choice, but now he's embroiled in controversy over his spending. So at the end of the day, it just might be.....Trump versus Hillary.

Nameless · 11-09-2015, 03:15 AM

He's a celebrity in a country that has a strong cultural focus on celebrities, shouldn't surprise anyone that he's more popular than someone with the unluckiest family name of the year. Guy should have run as the politician formerly known as Jeb if he wanted a chance.

Psy-Fi · 11-09-2015, 09:54 AM

William_the_Bloody · 02-09-2016, 08:16 PM

Trump 1 Cruz 1 Rubio 0

OccultHawk · 02-09-2016, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by William_the_Bloody

Trump 1 Cruz 1 Rubio 0

Except that's not how delegates operate.

11-08-2015, 02:58 PM	#76 (permalink)
William_the_Bloody Music Addict Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Sunnydale Cemetary Posts: 2,093	Uhg! I can only support a candidate on their anti free trade policies for so long, but I can't stomach it anymore, he's becoming a comical parody. I keep thinking he's going to fade once things get serious, but the problem is his cut throat business strategy of demolishing his competition has been very effective so far. He's completely crushed the Bush campaign, and now he's doing the same thing to Carson. Marco Rubio was looking like a good establishment choice, but now he's embroiled in controversy over his spending. So at the end of the day, it just might be.....Trump versus Hillary.

11-09-2015, 03:15 AM	#77 (permalink)
Nameless Fat girls in yoga pants Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 152	He's a celebrity in a country that has a strong cultural focus on celebrities, shouldn't surprise anyone that he's more popular than someone with the unluckiest family name of the year. Guy should have run as the politician formerly known as Jeb if he wanted a chance.

02-09-2016, 08:16 PM	#79 (permalink)
William_the_Bloody Music Addict Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Sunnydale Cemetary Posts: 2,093	Trump 1 Cruz 1 Rubio 0