Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > I am the Devil's advocate

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-30-2010, 12:35 PM   #11
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Jo da Plumbr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,754
Liked 10 Times on 8 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkt View Post
What's likely to happen in some locales is they will stretch the subjective term "reasonable" used in the ruling and keep bad gun control laws in place.
They done streched that reasonable BS around here already.


__________________
Jo da Plumbr is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2010, 04:59 AM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
gorknoids's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Virginia Beach,Virginia
Posts: 2,424
Liked 7 Times on 5 Posts
Likes Given: 5

Default

This decision, along with the Obama outrage over Arizona's decision to throw the BS flag and take on the illegalista hordes on their own have forced Americans to realize that Washington serves Washington, and no one else. That the venue was Obama's natal political greenhouse makes it all the sweeter.
We are the "United StateS" of America, not the "United State".



__________________

"Guns don't kill people. Male Kennedy's kill people."

gorknoids is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2010, 05:17 AM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
pandamonium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,601
Liked 3 Times on 3 Posts

Default

Well said Gork, I concur, 100%.

__________________
GUN CONTROL, I GOT THAT

"I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first. Thomas Jefferson
pandamonium is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2010, 10:56 AM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Yunus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: |,Maryland
Posts: 4,714
Liked 1034 Times on 612 Posts
Likes Given: 319

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gorknoids View Post
We are the "United StateS" of America, not the "United State".
I agree with you Gork, but aren't we praising the courts recent decision which reduced the power of the StateS to a power held by the State?
__________________

"Good people drink good beer."
Hunter S. Thompson

Yunus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2010, 01:06 PM   #15
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
robocop10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Austin,Texas, by God!!
Posts: 9,934
Liked 2598 Times on 1366 Posts
Likes Given: 202

Default

Could they try to repeal the 2nd Amendment? Sure. The process is drawn out and difficult. It would require a new Amendment be ratified by 3/4's of the states. I seriously doubt that will happen. Only one Amendment has ever been repealed (the 18th). There have only been 17 Amendments approved (ratified) since the adoption of the Constitution in 1791 (which included the first 10 Amendments, The Bill of Rights).

Over

__________________

In life, strive to take the high road....It offers a better field of fire.
"Robo is right" Fuzzball

robocop10mm is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2010, 06:59 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
KalashnikovJosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,156
Liked 320 Times on 191 Posts
Likes Given: 426

Default

Yunus,(and everyone else)you may find this article enlightening-

2nd Amendment Victory? An Opposing View – Tenth Amendment Center

__________________
"You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her whole soul."
-Mahatma Gandhi

http://jpfo.org/
III%
KalashnikovJosh is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2010, 07:42 PM   #17
bkt
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 6,973
Liked 1305 Times on 664 Posts
Likes Given: 151

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunus View Post
I agree with you Gork, but aren't we praising the courts recent decision which reduced the power of the StateS to a power held by the State?
In the context of only the first 10 amendments, yes. In the context of 14A, no.

Should a state have the authority to ban all media and internet discussion of a political party or candidate(s)? Most would agree that would be an infringement of 1A and that it is wrong. You can argue two things here. First, if a state did this (and some states DID elevate some religions over others and ban certain publications), the citizens of that state should rise up against their oppressive government and toss them out on their cans; we should not rely on Big Daddy Federal Government to come to the rescue. Second, one could argue that 14A was never legally ratified (it wasn't) and that it and anything based on it is a nullity. Reality being what it is, however, that isn't going to fly.

I take your point: we are applauding a big, central government stepping in and setting rules for states that fall OUTSIDE the body of the Constitution and which rest solely on 14a.


__________________
bkt is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes




Newest Threads