Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-27-2013, 06:32 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,075,058 times
Reputation: 17204

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar View Post
LOL. Wow...theres a difference between picking a reasonable solution, and picking an absolute. Free speech...doesn't mean yelling fire in a theatre for example.

Theres a ton of things like that. Look at my handle. Think about it. Is war good or bad? The answer is...it depends. Its grey. If you think i am going to say, hey-that guy in jail, he should have his firearms back while in prison, we shouldn't remove his right to them! No I am not. THATS common sense. And yes they DO pay attention to those laws-turns out violent felons get caught, and reimprisoned for just carrying a weapon, making it far less likely for them to do so, and if they do ignore those laws, well obviously they aren't planning on being law abiding and so we put them back in jail. WOW imagine that....

This constant exageration by the right, turning traffic tickets into felonies for example, makes us miss the important stuff, because you folks spend all your time screaming wolf. To you EVERYTHING the government does has some horrible plot behind it. What is wrong with you people? Doing this...makes it so the times we really do need to pay attention just gets lost amongst all of your screaming. Blah.
My ideas are stated pretty plainly here but while you start off O.K. there are many indeed trying every avenue they could possibly dream of to try and stop law abiding citizens from owning guns. The last attempt was directed at law abiding citizens.

My arguments were based upon simple basic Jr High level Constitutional facts. Your rights can be removed from you through Due Process. Misdemeanors do not reach that level. IMO those with mental health issues that would lead them to beating their wife or something to that level very well might. We can only generalize here as we have no specifics but for some, a life time ban may be a legitimate solution. As I noted, for many others who go through proper procedures to address their issues, likely not. Removing ones rights should be a pretty high bar. There are many though that want that bar set at "Because I do not like guns".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-27-2013, 07:31 AM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,490,663 times
Reputation: 1406
The Second Amendment does not grant any rights. Whatever rights that are secured by the Second Amendment are not unlimited, they are subject to law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 07:34 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,075,058 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
The Second Amendment does not grant any rights. Whatever rights that are secured by the Second Amendment are not unlimited, they are subject to law.
Not so. They are limited by the rest of the Constitution. If you want to argue minutia one can argue that laws have a very limited influence but that is it. It's very limited and only applies to the extreme's at best.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 07:45 AM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,490,663 times
Reputation: 1406
See: http://www.city-data.com/forum/27736540-post85.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 07:55 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,075,058 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
Can a law be passed that makes it illegal to vote twice? Yes. Can a law be passed that in any way restricts one's right to vote? No.

It's why we could pass things like a poll tax but they were thrown out. It's why D.C. could pass laws to restrict gun rights but they were thrown out.

To say that our rights are subject to laws is at best a vast generalization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 09:04 AM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,490,663 times
Reputation: 1406
It is not a generalization, it's a fact. All rights exist only by law. The example of the right to vote only begs the question that such right exists by law. For example, women did not have the right to vote until ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. Likewise, your right to have a gun is governed by law; which, as the Supreme Court has ruled, is not unlimited.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 09:12 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,075,058 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
It is not a generalization, it's a fact. All rights exist only by law. The example of the right to vote only begs the question that such right exists by law. For example, women did not have the right to vote until ratification of the Nineteenth Amendment in 1920. Likewise, your right to have a gun is governed by law; which, as the Supreme Court has ruled, is not unlimited.
While the Constitution could be considered "law" I suppose, it is above "laws". We can not pass a "law" to restrict the rights granted in the Constitution to vote. It's been tried. They've been struck down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 09:22 AM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,490,663 times
Reputation: 1406
I presume that you are referring to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973 et seq., and the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. ___ (2013). That does not support your position.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 09:33 AM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,075,058 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
I presume that you are referring to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C. 1973 et seq., and the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Shelby County v. Holder, 570 U.S. ___ (2013). That does not support your position.
It indeed does. There were some states that were trying to restrict the voting rights of certain people so in an effort to stop that the government required them to get approval for any new laws they tried to pass to make sure that they in no way conflicted with a persons Constitutional right to vote.

In Shelby v Holder the courts simply ruled that this oversight was no longer needed. It is exactly what I was talking about earlier. If someone beats their wife we can through due process remove their individual rights from them. As I said, I support them getting those rights restored if at some point in the future they prove they are no longer a risk to repeat doing what caused the state to act in the first place.

That is what happened in Shelby v Holder.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2013, 09:39 AM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,490,663 times
Reputation: 1406
No. The Supreme Court decision struck down sections 4(b) and 5 of the act, which required preclearance of target states before enacting voting laws. If anything, the decision opens the door for states to enact restrictions on voting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:24 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top