Supreme Court to decide on CC legality? - Page 11
Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Firearms Forums > Legal and Activism > Supreme Court to decide on CC legality?

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-06-2013, 07:30 PM   #101
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 544
Liked 235 Times on 151 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AIKIJUTSU
Whatever the excuse for the piece about the militia, it now gives anti's a way to "justify" their attempts to disarm us.
If you are going to argue for 2A, study it and the history behind it enough to make an informed argument in defense of our rights under it, and why it has the militia wording in it.
__________________
jigs-n-fixture is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2013, 07:37 PM   #102
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: The Free State of Winston, AL
Posts: 3,060
Liked 1977 Times on 1170 Posts
Likes Given: 944

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigByrd47119 View Post
Thank you! A good read. For those who claim to study history this is a must know!!!
The progressives can not survive in true Republic, that is why they have been hard at changing it to a democracy for many years!!!:mad
If you use some common sense you know the first step in transformation is demolition! You must remove the old to replace it with the new, just like when you remodel/transform a room in your house. The progressives are in the demolition phase right now but most people refuse to admit this is taking place!!!
__________________

An armed society is not always a polite society, but it is a free and safe society!
Self Defense is an absolute and natural right!
Keep your head down and your powder dry!


Last edited by JimRau; 03-06-2013 at 07:43 PM.
JimRau is offline  
BigByrd47119 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2013, 08:32 PM   #103
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,356
Liked 5747 Times on 3252 Posts
Likes Given: 5186

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jigs-n-fixture View Post
If you are going to argue for 2A, study it and the history behind it enough to make an informed argument in defense of our rights under it, and why it has the militia wording in it.
The so-called "militias clause" is what's called a "prefatory" clause. It explains the operative clause but can not modify the operative clause.

That was the basis of Justice Scalia's opinion in Heller vs D.C.

IOW, it's the same as if it had said "Because a well regulated...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jim, you really need to get back on your meds, man.
__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
BigByrd47119 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 03:06 PM   #104
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Northern,WI
Posts: 1,103
Liked 205 Times on 130 Posts
Likes Given: 434

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRau View Post
I say again 'Who here thinks they (the last two appointees) are more qualified to apply the law than we (the people) are??????
I don't think anyone on here (aside from a certain few) was thrilled with those appointments, but there is 1 thing that makes them more qualified to apply law than we, THEY ARE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT YOU AND I ARE NOT!!! Right or wrong that is the hand we were dealt.


Quote:
Originally Posted by JimRau View Post
So what you are saying is they will probably violate the Constitution/our RIGHTS once AGAIN !
Well the way I see it the Court will either violate 2A or 10A, one or the other, with whichever decision they come up with, now you said before you must support the Constitution completely not cherry pick it, so which is more acceptable to you to be vioated 2A or 10A?

Being 2A doesn't specifically mention CC I cannot see the court forcing CO to allow nonresident carry based on 2A, they are far more likely to uphold the 10A and allow states the power to have their own permit system. However what worries me is that if they go that route then they will set a precedent in which the antis in Illinois can challenge the lower court's decision which forces Illinois to offer some sort of carry law under 2A, that could possibly really screw over the residents of that state. After all this case is designed to sort out the differences between the 2 differing court opinions so it could do damage in that respect but it cannot infringe on the rights of anyone already living in a gun friendly state.
__________________

Vote Scott Walker for Governor June 5th 2012

blucoondawg is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 04:10 PM   #105
Moderator
FTF_MODERATOR.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
JonM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Rochester WI,Rochester WI
Posts: 17,596
Liked 5686 Times on 2971 Posts
Likes Given: 377

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blucoondawg View Post
I don't think anyone on here (aside from a certain few) was thrilled with those appointments, but there is 1 thing that makes them more qualified to apply law than we, THEY ARE JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT YOU AND I ARE NOT!!! Right or wrong that is the hand we were dealt.




Well the way I see it the Court will either violate 2A or 10A, one or the other, with whichever decision they come up with, now you said before you must support the Constitution completely not cherry pick it, so which is more acceptable to you to be vioated 2A or 10A?

Being 2A doesn't specifically mention CC I cannot see the court forcing CO to allow nonresident carry based on 2A, they are far more likely to uphold the 10A and allow states the power to have their own permit system. However what worries me is that if they go that route then they will set a precedent in which the antis in Illinois can challenge the lower court's decision which forces Illinois to offer some sort of carry law under 2A, that could possibly really screw over the residents of that state. After all this case is designed to sort out the differences between the 2 differing court opinions so it could do damage in that respect but it cannot infringe on the rights of anyone already living in a gun friendly state.
the constitution doesnt mention the right to be safe from search and siezure in your car or on your computer either. the general part about bearing arms covers ccw and open carry pretty clearly.
__________________

"Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound." — L. Neil Smith

The problem with being stupid is you cannot simply decide to stop doing dumb things...

JonM is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 04:53 PM   #106
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Jpyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sewell,NJ
Posts: 4,815
Liked 762 Times on 441 Posts
Likes Given: 457

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AIKIJUTSU
Just look at a picture of the SCOTUS. There are people there who should have retired a decade or more ago. There is one old bat that they have to prop her up so it looks like she is still alive. I would guess that some of them could be swayed by anyone who presents an argument. Whoever is the last one to present an argument will control the result of the vote.
I pray every night that every one of the justices stays healthy and lives until 2016. Think its bad now, how do you like the sound of justice Holder or Clinton?
__________________

"The whole of the Bill (of Rights) is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals.... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." (Albert Gallatin of the New York Historical Society, October 7, 1789)

"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." - George Washington

Jpyle is offline  
BigByrd47119 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 05:42 PM   #107
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,356
Liked 5747 Times on 3252 Posts
Likes Given: 5186

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jpyle View Post
I pray every night that every one of the justices stays healthy and lives until 2016.
Probably won't do any good if they do.

The damned "purists" will trash whoever the Republican candidate is, and hepl get Hitlery elected. No matter how conservative he is, if he's not Ron Paul he won't pass their test of purity.

Just like they did last year. And helped get they got Obama elected.
__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 06:27 PM   #108
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Northern,WI
Posts: 1,103
Liked 205 Times on 130 Posts
Likes Given: 434

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JonM View Post
the constitution doesnt mention the right to be safe from search and siezure in your car or on your computer either. the general part about bearing arms covers ccw and open carry pretty clearly.
I agree it should cover cc as well but obviously for many years it has been the Federal Gov'ts stance that cc is a state issue not a "right" which we are free to practice anywhere, obviously conditions have been improving in that regard but I cannot see any decision which would make nation wide Constitutional Carry legal in the near future. If it could happen it would be great but I don't believe it will happen.
__________________

Vote Scott Walker for Governor June 5th 2012

blucoondawg is offline  
locutus Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 07:19 PM   #109
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
BigByrd47119's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 3,401
Liked 1102 Times on 677 Posts
Likes Given: 2389

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by locutus View Post
Probably won't do any good if they do.

The damned "purists" will trash whoever the Republican candidate is, and hepl get Hitlery elected. No matter how conservative he is, if he's not Ron Paul he won't pass their test of purity.

Just like they did last year. And helped get they got Obama elected.
We will vote for Rand barring some unforseen disaster on his part (i.e. writes or votes for more gun control, which I am next to certain he would NEVER do). All the libertarians want is someone with libertarian tendencys just like Rand. He may be the PERFECT missing link between conservative republicans and libertarians. I am loving the Republican talking heads gushing over him. Gives me great hope.

The 10th Amendment does not give the states the right to violate the 2nd Amendment. If it (the 2A) had been properly interpreted and the 10A along with it, this would be universaly understood and accepted. Its the answer that violates neither Amendment and highlights perfectly the Federal Governments original purpose!
__________________

“Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it’s realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy.”
---Ron Paul

"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it."
---Dr. Martin Luther King

"If you think we are free today, you know nothing about tyranny and even less about freedom."
---Tom Braun

BigByrd47119 is offline  
locutus Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 09:19 PM   #110
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
locutus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,356
Liked 5747 Times on 3252 Posts
Likes Given: 5186

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigByrd47119 View Post
We will vote for Rand barring some unforseen disaster on his part (i.e. writes or votes for more gun control, which I am next to certain he would NEVER do). All the libertarians want is someone with libertarian tendencys just like Rand. He may be the PERFECT missing link between conservative republicans and libertarians. I am loving the Republican talking heads gushing over him. Gives me great hope.
From what I've seen I could support Rand enthusiastically.

My only worry is that he won't be able to put enough distance between himself and his nutty father to win a general election.

Hope I'm wrong
.
__________________
“We sleep safely at night because rough men stand ready to visit violence on those who would harm us.”


Winston Churchill
locutus is offline  
BigByrd47119 Likes This 
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
Terrifying Supreme Court Mosin Politics, Religion and Controversy 2 09-06-2012 03:02 PM
Supreme Court Decisions Flat Tire Politics, Religion and Controversy 345 07-11-2012 10:19 PM
New 2A cases to go before Supreme Court? BigByrd47119 Politics, Religion and Controversy 3 08-26-2009 02:40 AM
Supreme Court Appointment falseharmonix Politics, Religion and Controversy 28 05-30-2009 10:44 PM
Supreme Court on RKBA bkt Politics, Religion and Controversy 2 03-19-2008 01:30 AM