Author Topic: primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today  (Read 904 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57446
  • Reputation: +2186/-172
  • ^^^apres moi, le deluge
primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today
« on: March 18, 2008, 06:30:00 PM »
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3028219

Oh my.

How full of wonders, the world.

Quote
ThomWV  (1000+ posts)      Tue Mar-18-08 03:40 PM
Original message

It Was Pleasing To Hear The 2nd Amendment Case Before the Court Today

The arguments were interesting, the questions even more so. I paid particular attention to Kennedy (be I wasn't the only one) and it seemed to me, by the questions he asked, that he was staying on the Constitutional question and not letting himself be sidetracked by extraneous stuff. If I had to judge by the tone of the questioning I'd say that the anti-gun-nuts are going to lose big time on this one and the individual rights camp will prevail.

Well now, doesn't that take all?

How full of wonders, the world, a pro-2nd amendment primitive.

Quote
jmg257  (1000+ posts)      Tue Mar-18-08 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
 
1. I don't think there is any doubt left that it protects an individual right. And that is already law anyway. I think the big question/answer will be what level of scrutiny is allowed for supposed infringements on this right, i.e. what constitutes a "reasonable" restriction in order to satisfy gov't's compelling interest.

Of course putting to bed all the BS myths about "collective rights", "militia context only" etc. will be nice, but they still have a lot of room to sort of...please & dissapoint both sides (except specifically DC - I think their laws will be overturned to an extent). And there is also the question of states vs. feds legislation, which came up as well.

It will be interesting come June!

Quote
Mountainman (1000+ posts)      Tue Mar-18-08 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
2. "No one is saying you can't own a gun. No one is saying you can't carry a gun. All we are saying is that you can't carry a gun in Dodge."

Quote
MaryCeleste (582 posts)     Tue Mar-18-08 06:05 PM
Response to Reply #2
 
9. Or Wash DC

Fenty is reported to already screaming about getting a backup plan.

One thing I have gotten out of this is the high level of parallel between Gun Grabbers and Anti Choice bigots. They both use evey chance they get to nibble away at that which they abhor.

If they come done as a state decision, we can kiss Roe goodbye

Quote
ThomWV  (1000+ posts)      Tue Mar-18-08 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #9

11. This will be "Roe" for the Gun people

Quote
MaryCeleste (582 posts)     Tue Mar-18-08 06:25 PM
Response to Reply #11

12. Moreover if they make it a state issues means that Roe will be one too and we all know where that will lead

One hopes.

Quote
michreject  (1000+ posts)       Tue Mar-18-08 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
 
3. Kennedy shocked me

I make it a strong 5 to 4 in favor of gun ownership rights.

Quote
ThomWV  (1000+ posts)      Tue Mar-18-08 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #3

4. Actually I think it might actually go 6/3 or better.

Quote
michreject  (1000+ posts)       Tue Mar-18-08 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #4

5. So do I

I was being pessimistic.

Quote
NickB79 (1000+ posts)      Tue Mar-18-08 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
 
6. How long is this expected to take?

When might we see the final ruling?

Quote
ThomWV  (1000+ posts)      Tue Mar-18-08 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #6

7. Around June would be about right. This one will be one of the last they get around to.

The easy ones come first.

Quote
endarkenment (1000+ posts)       Tue Mar-18-08 04:59 PM
Response to Original message
 
8. The court could not care less about individual rights.

They have demonstrated this fact over and over again. If they discover, miraculously, that such a right exists within the second (which of course it does) it will be for reasons that have nothing to do with individuals or their right to keep and bear arms.

Quote
bryant69  (1000+ posts)       Tue Mar-18-08 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #8

10. are they being bribed by smith and wesson? 

Or what is your theory?

Anybody want to guess how the Impeached One's judges, Breyer and Bader-Ginsberg, are going to vote on this?
Democrats: A bunch of rich people convincing poor people to vote for rich people by telling poor people that other rich people are the reason they are poor

Life is short, and suddenly you're not there any more.

Offline ReardenSteel

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3462
  • Reputation: +204/-18
Re: primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today
« Reply #1 on: March 18, 2008, 06:42:13 PM »
Supreme Court leaning towards upholding Second Amendment rights?
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/18/supreme-court-leaning-towards-upholding-second-amendment-rights/


Man I really hope this goes well. It should. Crime is up in DC since the ban. (shocked! shocked to find out that guns protect people!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM_A4Skusro
"When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors - when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - you may know that your society is doomed."

- Ayn Rand
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=1826

Offline guest

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 436
  • Reputation: +0/-0
Re: primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today
« Reply #2 on: March 18, 2008, 06:47:26 PM »
Supreme Court leaning towards upholding Second Amendment rights?
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/18/supreme-court-leaning-towards-upholding-second-amendment-rights/


Man I really hope this goes well. It should. Crime is up in DC since the ban. (shocked! shocked to find out that guns protect people!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM_A4Skusro

Oh, I also hope things go our way on this issue.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2008, 08:01:18 PM by ACrazyConservative »

Offline Rebel

  • Stick a fork in us. We're done.
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16127
  • Reputation: +987/-215
Re: primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today
« Reply #3 on: March 18, 2008, 07:48:13 PM »
The Bill of Rights were 10 guaranteed rights to individuals. These were a contingency for Jefferson to even SIGN the damn founding documents.

Now, what kind of numbnuts can sit there, with a straight face, and say that while the other 9 amendments pertained to citizens, the 2nd did not?

This ruling would take me .0000001211111 seconds to make a decision.
NAMBLA is a left-wing organization.

Quote
There's a reason why patriotism is considered a conservative value. Watch a Tea Party rally and you'll see people proudly raising the American flag and showing pride in U.S. heroes such as Thomas Jefferson. Watch an OWS rally and you'll see people burning the American flag while showing pride in communist heroes such as Che Guevera. --Bob, from some news site




Offline BlueStateSaint

  • Here I come to save the day, because I'm a
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 32542
  • Reputation: +1560/-191
  • RIP FDNY Lt. Rich Nappi d. 4/16/12
Re: primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today
« Reply #4 on: March 19, 2008, 04:47:51 AM »
The Bill of Rights were 10 guaranteed rights to individuals. These were a contingency for Jefferson to even SIGN the damn founding documents.

Now, what kind of numbnuts can sit there, with a straight face, and say that while the other 9 amendments pertained to citizens, the 2nd did not?

This ruling would take me .0000001211111 seconds to make a decision.


Same here.  And, who knows how Ginsberg and Breyer would go?  They'll be in the minority.  That's all that matters.  What I would want would be something that not only affirms that it is an individual right, but also makes all gun control--Federal, state, and local--illegal and unconstitutional.
"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

"All you have to do is look straight and see the road, and when you see it, don't sit looking at it - walk!" -Ayn Rand
 
"Those that trust God with their safety must yet use proper means for their safety, otherwise they tempt Him, and do not trust Him.  God will provide, but so must we also." - Matthew Henry, Commentary on 2 Chronicles 32, from Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible

"These anti-gun fools are more dangerous to liberty than street criminals or foreign spies."--Theodore Haas, Dachau Survivor

Chase her.
Chase her even when she's yours.
That's the only way you'll be assured to never lose her.

Offline DumbAss Tanker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28241
  • Reputation: +1687/-151
Re: primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today
« Reply #5 on: March 19, 2008, 05:12:48 AM »
The Bill of Rights were 10 guaranteed rights to individuals. These were a contingency for Jefferson to even SIGN the damn founding documents.

Now, what kind of numbnuts can sit there, with a straight face, and say that while the other 9 amendments pertained to citizens, the 2nd did not?

This ruling would take me .0000001211111 seconds to make a decision.


Well, the first eight were, anyway; people are still arguing about what exactly the 9th and 10th do but they don't deal with particular, identifiable individual rights.
Go and tell the Spartans, O traveler passing by
That here, obedient to their law, we lie.

Anything worth shooting once is worth shooting at least twice.

Offline dixierat

  • All the Way, any day.
  • Probationary (Probie)
  • Posts: 33
  • Reputation: +0/-0
Re: primitives pleased about 2nd amendment arguments today
« Reply #6 on: March 19, 2008, 07:19:27 AM »
The Bill of Rights were 10 guaranteed rights to individuals. These were a contingency for Jefferson to even SIGN the damn founding documents.

Now, what kind of numbnuts can sit there, with a straight face, and say that while the other 9 amendments pertained to citizens, the 2nd did not?

This ruling would take me .0000001211111 seconds to make a decision.


Well, the first eight were, anyway; people are still arguing about what exactly the 9th and 10th do but they don't deal with particular, identifiable individual rights.

Since 1865, the 10th Amendment has had no meaning. And especially so since the Sentae becae representatives of the People instead of the State governments.
“Of every one hundred men, ten shouldn’t even be there, eighty are nothing but targets, nine are real fighters… We are lucky to have them… They make the battle. Ah, but the one, one of them is a Warrior… and he will bring the others back.” Hericletus, circa 500BC