SCOTUS strikes down DC gun ban!

[OilPatch197]

As if there isn't enough laws already. Other then Roe v Wade, this is the most historical decision the USSC has handed down since the Constitutionwas written into law.

I dissagree with this, a few other cases that are just as "historical"....

--Lawrence v. Texas

--West Virginia State Board of Education vs. Barnette

--Dred Scott decision

and you did mention Roe vs Wade, what is interesting is the Dred Scott and Roe v. Wade cases are nearly identical. In both cases the Court stripped all rights from a class of human beings and reduced them to nothing more than the property of others.

Compare the arguments the Court used to justify slavery and abortion. Clearly, in the Court's eyes, unborn children are now the same "beings of an inferior order" that the justices considered Blacks to be over a century ago.

Lawrence v. Texas is another dumb ruling from the court, they threw out precedence from a 15 year earlier ruling and reversed their decision causing nothing but confusion and disorder.

I could go all day about this, but it would BORE you.

0
0
0

 

[Ranger1989]

Fox News is NOT slanted to the right, they just SEEM that way because
the other media is so slanted to the LEFT.

Frankly I think Fox is a bit TOO "Fair and balanced" for my taste, I wouldn't be NEARLY as polite as they are to the obviously leftist bastards who keep calling them right.

the whole leftist cause is an endless series of emotional appeals
"lets do this for the children" makes me start looking for a shovel
Not to scoop away the bullshit, but rather to dig a grave for the
person spewing that manure.

Appeal to my logic and reason and I'll hear you out.
I don't guarantee I'll agree with you but I will listen and discuss
(except if you get too pendantic)
If you appeal to my emotions you'd better be female,
attractive, unattached and uninhibited and when speaking
about children they'd better be children that fit in the
classifications of "Yours" or "Ours".



I'd give up my guns.... Bullets first.

AD

Fox News too fair and balanced? That's cute. Either way, this is a good thing. It has been proven time and time again that places with higher gun ownership have less crime.

 

[Simple_serf]

While I belive this is very very good news, This isn't over at all.

Certain restrictions are still going to be allowed, such as registration, background checks, etc.

As a survivalist (and somebody who is generally anti-government) living in the state of NY, It's those types of laws that bother me.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

While I belive this is very very good news, This isn't over at all.

Certain restrictions are still going to be allowed, such as registration, background checks, etc.

As a survivalist (and somebody who is generally anti-government) living in the state of NY, It's those types of laws that bother me.

I don't have a problem with keeping guns away from felons and nutjobs.

Driving a car is is a privelage too, the constitution says you can freely move around the country but doesn't mention if that is walking or riding in a Ferrari... I haven't ever heard of anybody having a problem with that. The second ammendment says you can defend yourself, whether that is a bowie knife or an AR-15 should depend on your competancy just like a car IMO. Not everybody should be behind the wheel, nor should everybody should be entitled to own a gun.

Registration I don't think would be too bad either... like a car get caught with someone elses gun (or one without a serial number) without an excuse you go down for grand theft firearm.

Heck I remember back in middle school the local PD had a program where they took down a discription and serial number of our bikes so in case they were stolen they had something to go by, it cost a buck, something like that is all I am for.

A permit of some sort (going thru a safety class) to buy a gun would be a good thing too IMO. You have to do it to get a hunting license, I think it should be to buy a gun period. Going to Wally-World, slapping down an ID and getting a 30-06 on a whim is a tad too easy, there are many people that have no clue how to safely handle and store these things. It wouldn't help the public shootings much, but would help with accidental shootings (kids getting ahold of dad's loaded gun and playing cops and robbers with it) At least then you wouldn't have to see the parents on tv blather that they "never thought of something like this happening". Not so much for the whole gun control thing, but to force feed new gun buyers safety information rather than let them figure it out on their own.

 

[AllanD]

Before someone whines about Sean Hannidy again, I'll just point out that Sean shares his show with Alan Combs, and any future complaints are stilborn.

And don't confuse "commentary" shows with actual "news"

Sean Hannidy doesn't read news he comments on it.
there's a difference.

The NEWS is delievered neutrally.

BOTH sides are typically heard from.
And Fox DID interview BOTH the Mayor of DC and Wayne LaPierre
so they did cover "both sides" of he story.

MY comment is that why do liberals insist on believing the ridiculous
Notion that CRIMINALS are going to obey an anti gun law?

All Gun laws do is affect the law abiding...

So "we need some controls" is a false statement from the word GO.

"protecting the children"? Bullshit.

The Children HAVE guns of their own (illegal of course) and they
are the ones doing much of the shooting!

They LIE and ecause they phrase it a certain way they think they
can use their phrasing to prevent the obvious counter arguement.

I'm sure it was a liberal who first came up with
"have you stopped beating your wife?" Answer yes or No!
"But I'm not married!" "Then it's "No" you damned wife beater!"

"Don't you wanna do it for the children?" shreds my last remaining strand
of self-control that is preventing me from choking the crap out of them.

It's all about "spin" and weak minded people who get suckered by it.

Don't worry about me and my guns, worry about the guy who wants
to take them away from me, because you can be damned sure when
he gets those guns he'll be after your freedom of speech next.

BTW, there were a few cases in california (and the case in Virginia)
where "privacy issues" prevented police from being aware that someone WAS a "nutjob"

California's response is to take guns from EVERYONE
rather than tell Law enforcement and gun dealers
about people who shouldn't have guns.

Stupid.


AD

 

[Simple_serf]

Sorry, but I don't need government knowing what I have or what I am doing.

Ever.

Add to that that I am currently living in the People's Republic of New York.

Felons and Nutjobs get firearms anyways. hell, they usually get them easier than the rest of us.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Sorry, but I don't need government knowing what I have or what I am doing.

Ever.

Add to that that I am currently living in the People's Republic of New York.

Felons and Nutjobs get firearms anyways. hell, they usually get them easier than the rest of us.

Hehe, I could care less if they know what I have or not. I really doubt my collection would envoke much fear into the US Govt anyway if they were going to come in and take it all away...

So you honestly think that anybody that wants a gun should be able to go down to Cabela's or where ever and just get one? How would this make anything better?

 

[airborn_ranger]

i will never give up my permit to carry my gun.

Then why did you bother to get a permit? Registration is the step before confiscation. Look at Cuba, pre-Hitler Germany, pre-Musolini Italy!

 

[airborn_ranger]

2nd thought

After re-reading your post, it seems that you will never give up your permit...what about the firearm?

 

[VaGent]

There are certain reason WHY the government wants to KNOW who has guns. First is to make sure you have them legally. The second is to let the local jurisdictions KNOW you have them for TAX reasons. It's all about MONEY & CONTROL. If you think otherwise you are kidding yourself. The criminals get off scott free while the honest law abideing citizen gets screwed coming & going. It's none of he governments business how many guns I own, what caliber they are OR when I last shot them. I have the RIGHT TO OWN & BEAR ARMS. The constitution does not say anywhere the government has the right to know what I have or how many I have. NO WHERE does it say that in the Constitution. It's all about FRUIT CAKES, CONTROL FREAKS & MONEY HUNGRY greedy politicians.

I over heard a 4th year college student make the following statement upon hearing the USSC ruling on guns yesterday. She told her boyfriend: Now why do I all of a sudden feel LESS safe because of this ruling? DUH!!! She hates guns, hunting or anything that implies either one all because she just does. She's one of the FRUIT CAKES who believes we should outlaw the #2 pencil because it can be used as a weapon. I asked her why don't we just go ahead & outlaw cars too. She looked at me like I was nuts. I told her to check out the number of deaths by honest automobile owners verses those by "honest gun owners". She didn't have a reply to that statement. Some people can't see the forest for looking at the trees. When I ask her if she felt she had the right to own a gun her reply was: "why do I need to own a gun, I don't intend to shoot anyone". She never did answer my question as to her right to own a gun.

 

[philS]

Scary thing is, it was 5-4 in favor -- hardly a definitive ruling.

Imagine if President Bush had gone ahead and nominated Harriet Myers, and she was approved instead of Alito or Roberts. The vote could have been 5-4 AGAINST.

We just squeaked by on this one.

Imagine there are four tools on the SCOTUS who cannot interpret the basic Queen's English as to what "the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" is all about.

 

[wvabeer]

A permit only allows you to carry conceiled, it isn't a gun permit. Here in west Virginia most all adults have guns and a great many have permits. Maybe thats why we have lower crime than other states. I don't watch FOX news I think they sensationalize every news report ,I hate that. Now this is only my opinion
Kenny

 

[Dangeranger3]

Driving a car is is a privelage too.

"Too" as in addition to something. What other privelage? Owning a gun is right, not a privelage. Just b/c the gov't treats it as a privelage does not make it one. Upon further reading of your post, I had you pegged wrong. Not talking down to ya, I just thought a farm boy like you would want less gov't intrusion. I'm right next to AllanD and simple_serf on this one. ( I just wanted to use the gun smiley )

 

[bobbywalter]

Political Correctness: A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

thats good stuff.









fuk the government.

 

[crbnunit]

Alaska does not require you to have a permit to carry concealed. If you can legally own a firearm, you can legally carry concealed. That does not absolve you from knowing the laws but so many people carry here it was the "law of the land" before our legislature passed it anyway. Very few of the weapons I have purchased over the years have any paperwork involved in the transaction. The "government" would have a hard time getting me to register them let alone finding them. Government has about as much business knowing what firearms I own as knowing how many sheets of TP I use in a day. It is just none of their business. People up here use their guns every day for work, for play and for survival. No one is going to give them up willingly and I don't think the "Lower 48" really wants to invade Alaska. I am guessing there are very few households here that do not contain at least one firearm and someone that is fairly skilled in its use.