Gawain 0 #1 June 28, 2010 http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/06/28/high-courts-big-ruling-for-gun-rights/ http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9GKARU01&show_article=1 Edit to add: I forgot to comment. Whoops! "...a right the Founders specifically delegated to individuals." Thank goodness! And on the day that the confirmation hearings for Kagan begin...So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
maxmadmax 8 #2 June 28, 2010 Outstanding!!! Don't go away mad....just go away! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #3 June 28, 2010 Who would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! This means that states and municipalities can't just pick and choose which parts they like, and ignore the remainder, denying certain constitutional rights to their citizens. Damn that NRA! I am disturbed though, once again, that the vote was only 5-4 in favor of equal constitutional rights for everyone. The four justices in dissent apparently think they aren't so much "constitutional rights", but rather just "constitutional maybes". Now Mayor Daley will start dancing around the ruling and continue to find ways to deny gun rights to Chicagoans. He'll require training, registration, insurance, large fees, and so on. And the NRA will have to sue him again... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #4 June 28, 2010 And the often abused, battered, and maligned Constitution of the United States holds fast and shines through. Nice!---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #5 June 28, 2010 Here's the opinion: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf it's 214 pages with concurrence and dissents. It'll be a while before I get through it My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #6 June 28, 2010 QuoteSupreme Court Rules - Gun Rights ALL 50 STATESQuote Wait a minute - I thought there were 58! I am sure there is, he said so!I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #7 June 28, 2010 Quote Who would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! This means that states and municipalities can't just pick and choose which parts they like, and ignore the remainder, denying certain constitutional rights to their citizens. Damn that NRA! I am disturbed though, once again, that the vote was only 5-4 in favor of equal constitutional rights for everyone... Now Mayor Daley will start dancing around the ruling and continue to find ways to deny gun rights to Chicagoans. He'll require training, registration, insurance, large fees, and so on. And the NRA will have to sue him again... That has not always applied to EVERYONE. But at least it has gotten better... hell they even let me vote nowadays and I can own guns even.Woe be unto those who would try to take those rights from me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites FreeflyChile 0 #8 June 28, 2010 QuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! This means that states and municipalities can't just pick and choose which parts they like, and ignore the remainder, denying certain constitutional rights to their citizens. Damn that NRA! I am disturbed though, once again, that the vote was only 5-4 in favor of equal constitutional rights for everyone... Now Mayor Daley will start dancing around the ruling and continue to find ways to deny gun rights to Chicagoans. He'll require training, registration, insurance, large fees, and so on. And the NRA will have to sue him again... From a friend of mine working for the govt - that's EXACTLY what the city plans to do. They'll modify the law to fall within the SC decision, which will require a new suit, which depending on the decision, they'll mod the law again..and so on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Profman 0 #9 June 28, 2010 Good thing they did not delay the arguments. With the next justice about ready to be confirmed (Kagan), it would have been very different.The dangers of life are infinite, and among them is safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #10 June 28, 2010 Profman, it wouldn't be an different. Kagan would have voted exactly like the justice she is set to replace. No change in the vote or the majority opinion. As to the decision, it's a long read so I'll hold off on specifics, but I can predict that Chicago will act just like DC, they will continue to deny rights, making another lawsuit necessary. It's just too bad they will continue to waste time and money to fight a losing battle trying to save worthless laws that can't protect individuals or the public at large. I did get a laugh out of the dissent that mentions how democracy means courts should bow to local opinion and why does a judge know better. That's a hoot coming from one of the most activist justices on the SCUS bench. Judges should interpret the law, not waste time on politics and opinion. If it's not written into the constitution then it should be left to the states or the people. (a radical idea for a liberal, I know)witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites JohnRich 4 #11 June 28, 2010 Quote Quote Who would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! That has not always applied to EVERYONE. But at least it has gotten better... hell they even let me vote nowadays and I can own guns even. Yes, it used to be that the constitution didn't apply to blacks. And part of it didn't apply to women. America grew up and got over those injustices. Yet somehow, the gun-o-phobes think it's okay to still deny part of the constitution, the 2nd Amendment, to large groups of people, like those living in Washington D.C., Chicago, Illinois, and Oak Park, Illinois. Now the Supreme Court has smacked those exceptions down too. It's another blow for freedom, thanks to the NRA! But the margin is too narrow. All it would take is for one conservative justice to be replaced by an Obama liberal, and then unequal gun rights could return to apply once again. Your constitutional rights would not be guaranteed by the federal government, but instead would be determined by the city in which you happen to live, and whether the mayor and city council deem you worthy of constitutional rights... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #12 June 28, 2010 QuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #13 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. Guess today you're reaching for any small victory you can. That's a given, just as many of the other rights are altered for felons and the mentally incapacitated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites beowulf 1 #14 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. I don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,122 #15 June 28, 2010 QuoteI don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. If the founding fathers wanted to exclude them, wouldn't they have said so? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites beowulf 1 #16 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteI don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. If the founding fathers wanted to exclude them, wouldn't they have said so? Do you think they armed their prisoners? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,122 #17 June 28, 2010 I didn't know the founding fathers kept prisoners. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Kennedy 0 #18 June 28, 2010 Really, that's the best you can do? Generally we call it a strawman when you create a weak argument that no opponent has proposed and then knock it down and claim your real opponents are wrong. And if you bothered to do your homework you'd see that many of the papers from the founding fathers make mention of free men, or of people capable of bearing arms. Those two things pretty clearly would limit felons and your "loonies," don't you think? But then, you have trouble with "the people" actually meaning "the people," so I understand if you have trouble with old time reading comprehension.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #19 June 28, 2010 hey, it's been a hard day for them. Think of the upcoming experiment we get to have in Chicago. What happens when the citizens are allowed to defend themselves? Will it get better or worse than the status quo, where 52 people get shot, 8 killed in a single weekend? We could also have an over/under on how much tax payer money Daley blows on legal defenses for his unAmerican efforts to block the Constitution. And New York - you're next. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #20 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. I don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. What part of "EVERYONE" is it that you don't understand?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kallend 1,623 #21 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. Guess today you're reaching for any small victory you can. That's a given, just as many of the other rights are altered for felons and the mentally incapacitated. Lame. Can you link to any post where I ever asked for a gun ban except on felons and loonies?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,122 #22 June 28, 2010 QuoteAnd if you bothered to do your homework you'd see that many of the papers from the founding fathers make mention of free men, or of people capable of bearing arms. Those two things pretty clearly would limit felons and your "loonies," don't you think? Looks like that is a better response than beowolf's "They", which refers back to the Founding Fathers. QuoteBut then, you have trouble with "the people" actually meaning "the people," so I understand if you have trouble with old time reading comprehension. LOL, I could care less what Americans do with their guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #23 June 28, 2010 Quote LOL, I could care less what Americans do with their guns. Must be that other Skydekker then that so frequently posts on the subject of American guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #24 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. Guess today you're reaching for any small victory you can. That's a given, just as many of the other rights are altered for felons and the mentally incapacitated. Lame. Can you link to any post where I ever asked for a gun ban except on felons and loonies? I could, but why? You already know what you said and as best I know you're not fooling yourself with the silly misdirects. Also irrelevant to this thread. No one asked what you asked for here. But you do have a history of reframing the discussion when convenient to you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkyDekker 1,122 #25 June 28, 2010 QuoteMust be that other Skydekker then that so frequently posts on the subject of American guns. I often don't agree with the reasoning used and will give my opinion on that. In the end, whether or not you get to play with guns doesn't effect me at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 1 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Amazon 7 #7 June 28, 2010 Quote Who would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! This means that states and municipalities can't just pick and choose which parts they like, and ignore the remainder, denying certain constitutional rights to their citizens. Damn that NRA! I am disturbed though, once again, that the vote was only 5-4 in favor of equal constitutional rights for everyone... Now Mayor Daley will start dancing around the ruling and continue to find ways to deny gun rights to Chicagoans. He'll require training, registration, insurance, large fees, and so on. And the NRA will have to sue him again... That has not always applied to EVERYONE. But at least it has gotten better... hell they even let me vote nowadays and I can own guns even.Woe be unto those who would try to take those rights from me. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FreeflyChile 0 #8 June 28, 2010 QuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! This means that states and municipalities can't just pick and choose which parts they like, and ignore the remainder, denying certain constitutional rights to their citizens. Damn that NRA! I am disturbed though, once again, that the vote was only 5-4 in favor of equal constitutional rights for everyone... Now Mayor Daley will start dancing around the ruling and continue to find ways to deny gun rights to Chicagoans. He'll require training, registration, insurance, large fees, and so on. And the NRA will have to sue him again... From a friend of mine working for the govt - that's EXACTLY what the city plans to do. They'll modify the law to fall within the SC decision, which will require a new suit, which depending on the decision, they'll mod the law again..and so on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Profman 0 #9 June 28, 2010 Good thing they did not delay the arguments. With the next justice about ready to be confirmed (Kagan), it would have been very different.The dangers of life are infinite, and among them is safety. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #10 June 28, 2010 Profman, it wouldn't be an different. Kagan would have voted exactly like the justice she is set to replace. No change in the vote or the majority opinion. As to the decision, it's a long read so I'll hold off on specifics, but I can predict that Chicago will act just like DC, they will continue to deny rights, making another lawsuit necessary. It's just too bad they will continue to waste time and money to fight a losing battle trying to save worthless laws that can't protect individuals or the public at large. I did get a laugh out of the dissent that mentions how democracy means courts should bow to local opinion and why does a judge know better. That's a hoot coming from one of the most activist justices on the SCUS bench. Judges should interpret the law, not waste time on politics and opinion. If it's not written into the constitution then it should be left to the states or the people. (a radical idea for a liberal, I know)witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #11 June 28, 2010 Quote Quote Who would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! That has not always applied to EVERYONE. But at least it has gotten better... hell they even let me vote nowadays and I can own guns even. Yes, it used to be that the constitution didn't apply to blacks. And part of it didn't apply to women. America grew up and got over those injustices. Yet somehow, the gun-o-phobes think it's okay to still deny part of the constitution, the 2nd Amendment, to large groups of people, like those living in Washington D.C., Chicago, Illinois, and Oak Park, Illinois. Now the Supreme Court has smacked those exceptions down too. It's another blow for freedom, thanks to the NRA! But the margin is too narrow. All it would take is for one conservative justice to be replaced by an Obama liberal, and then unequal gun rights could return to apply once again. Your constitutional rights would not be guaranteed by the federal government, but instead would be determined by the city in which you happen to live, and whether the mayor and city council deem you worthy of constitutional rights... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #12 June 28, 2010 QuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #13 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. Guess today you're reaching for any small victory you can. That's a given, just as many of the other rights are altered for felons and the mentally incapacitated. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #14 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. I don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #15 June 28, 2010 QuoteI don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. If the founding fathers wanted to exclude them, wouldn't they have said so? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #16 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteI don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. If the founding fathers wanted to exclude them, wouldn't they have said so? Do you think they armed their prisoners? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #17 June 28, 2010 I didn't know the founding fathers kept prisoners. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #18 June 28, 2010 Really, that's the best you can do? Generally we call it a strawman when you create a weak argument that no opponent has proposed and then knock it down and claim your real opponents are wrong. And if you bothered to do your homework you'd see that many of the papers from the founding fathers make mention of free men, or of people capable of bearing arms. Those two things pretty clearly would limit felons and your "loonies," don't you think? But then, you have trouble with "the people" actually meaning "the people," so I understand if you have trouble with old time reading comprehension.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #19 June 28, 2010 hey, it's been a hard day for them. Think of the upcoming experiment we get to have in Chicago. What happens when the citizens are allowed to defend themselves? Will it get better or worse than the status quo, where 52 people get shot, 8 killed in a single weekend? We could also have an over/under on how much tax payer money Daley blows on legal defenses for his unAmerican efforts to block the Constitution. And New York - you're next. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #20 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. I don't remember anyone ever asking for felons and loonies to be allowed to legally own guns. What part of "EVERYONE" is it that you don't understand?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,623 #21 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. Guess today you're reaching for any small victory you can. That's a given, just as many of the other rights are altered for felons and the mentally incapacitated. Lame. Can you link to any post where I ever asked for a gun ban except on felons and loonies?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #22 June 28, 2010 QuoteAnd if you bothered to do your homework you'd see that many of the papers from the founding fathers make mention of free men, or of people capable of bearing arms. Those two things pretty clearly would limit felons and your "loonies," don't you think? Looks like that is a better response than beowolf's "They", which refers back to the Founding Fathers. QuoteBut then, you have trouble with "the people" actually meaning "the people," so I understand if you have trouble with old time reading comprehension. LOL, I could care less what Americans do with their guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #23 June 28, 2010 Quote LOL, I could care less what Americans do with their guns. Must be that other Skydekker then that so frequently posts on the subject of American guns. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #24 June 28, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWho would have ever imagined that the Constitution, along with its Bill of Rights, actually applies to EVERYONE. (sarcasm) What a radical concept! EVERYONE? No, they explicitly left in place restrictions on felons and loonies. Guess today you're reaching for any small victory you can. That's a given, just as many of the other rights are altered for felons and the mentally incapacitated. Lame. Can you link to any post where I ever asked for a gun ban except on felons and loonies? I could, but why? You already know what you said and as best I know you're not fooling yourself with the silly misdirects. Also irrelevant to this thread. No one asked what you asked for here. But you do have a history of reframing the discussion when convenient to you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,122 #25 June 28, 2010 QuoteMust be that other Skydekker then that so frequently posts on the subject of American guns. I often don't agree with the reasoning used and will give my opinion on that. In the end, whether or not you get to play with guns doesn't effect me at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
