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.
Good. Fuddruckers just got more of my business...unless they wuss out and cave in to the gun nuts. Sorry, but if you demand the right to carry firearms into a place over the wishes of the owner of that place, then you're a gun nut, because no one else's rights mean anything to you.
Wrong again. Some quotes from the Heller decision:
"Nowhere else in the Constitution does a ‘right’ attributed to ‘the people’ refer to anything other than an individual right.”
“Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”
“[T]here are a few examples, all of which favor viewing the right to ‘keep Arms’ as an individual right unconnected with militia service…’Keep arms’ was simply a common way of referring to possessing arms, for militiamen and everyone else.”
“At the time of the founding, as now, to ‘bear’ meant to ‘carry.’. . . When used with ‘arms,’ however, the term has a meaning that refers to carrying for a particular purpose – confrontation.”
Quote:
Like most rights, the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." The Court's opinion, although refraining from an exhaustive analysis of the full scope of the right, "should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
Oh, wow, would you look at that...they didn't find that you have an innate right to carry around a gun. Golly gee.
Regardless, this decision will probably be overturned next time around.
The "professors " at Yale or Harvard have a certain ideology,right..?
If they are anti -gun they will twist their thought so as to make an anti-gun argument...
All "professors " ,who actually are political persons ,have no credibility as scientists.
Mathematicians,physicists,chemists etc ,who produce objective theories,neither rightwing or leftwing ,are the true scientists...
There is no rightwing & leftwing arithmetics...1+1=2,in communism, socialism,capitalism...
However,there is rightwing & leftwing interpretation of a law...
So,don't bust our nerves with beardos & four-eyeds who pose as... "professors "...
For the bolded part: Yes, education of others in the field where they are well-versed.
You continually make things up and expect us to argue you.
Education is a good thing, everyone should try it.
If you really feel that you are in danger when you go out and about on your normal errands, you need a change of lifestyle at the very least. You are going to the wrong places.
Easier said than done. You see, where I live, in Indy, we are so weak on almost every crime, that the criminals don't fear to commit simple misdemeanors over and over and over. All they get is slaps on the wrist. Many of the thugs don't even have licenses, or if they do, are suspended because it is common in this city for poor folks to never have insurance and/or not pay their traffic tickets. Still, many continue to drive, they have no fear of another summons to court, or even getting locked up for 12 hours. So, they drive, and they leave their neighborhoods and venture into my neighborhood. They shop at the same places I shop at. They are now moving into Section 8 complexes near me.
If you have money, what you suggest is easy to do. If I had the money, I would move. Living _anywhere_ in the Indy metro area can be dangerous. The thugs are driving into the suburbs to rob their banks, their pharmacies, etc.. If government hadn't failed me and others, then I likely wouldn't feel the need to constantly carry, but they have failed me. They wasted money on things that should have been secondary, so we have a jail over crowding problem, no money to hire more state prison guards, etc. etc..
For the bolded part: Yes, education of others in the field where they are well-versed.
You continually make things up and expect us to argue you.
Education is a good thing, everyone should try it.
An education in socialism may be good for u & your clerical job,but not for me...
I hope Fuddruckers and other places that forbid carrying firearms, as is their right to do, realize that they have assumed the responsibility for protecting me from criminal acts. If I am harmed in one of these establishments because I willingly left my firearm behind, thus restricting my ability to deal with a robbery or assault, they will be held responsible for the damages.
I hardly"freak out". I worked as a gunsmith for nearly four years, I hunted for over forty, and I probably have more firearms in my home than you do.
When I go out, I see no need to carry a sidearm unless I am hunting or fishing. in the woods and near water down here are poisonous snakes, wild hogs, bobcats, and rare but occasional rabid animals. It also can serve as a signalling device should I require aid.
I don't go to places where I am likely to need to use a pistol on a human, having learned long ago to stay out of such places. I have absolutely no fear while wandering around the city here (or anywhere else, for that matter), and I have no desire to become a hero.
If you really feel that you are in danger when you go out and about on your normal errands, you need a change of lifestyle at the very least. You are going to the wrong places.
Wrong again. Some quotes from the Heller decision:
"Nowhere else in the Constitution does a ‘right’ attributed to ‘the people’ refer to anything other than an individual right.”
“Putting all of these textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”
“[T]here are a few examples, all of which favor viewing the right to ‘keep Arms’ as an individual right unconnected with militia service…’Keep arms’ was simply a common way of referring to possessing arms, for militiamen and everyone else.”
“At the time of the founding, as now, to ‘bear’ meant to ‘carry.’. . . When used with ‘arms,’ however, the term has a meaning that refers to carrying for a particular purpose – confrontation.”
The important part of Heller is what the Court didn't say. The Court left in place the District of Columbia's ban on carrying firearms. You can have one in your home. That's all the court ruled.
I hope Fuddruckers and other places that forbid carrying firearms, as is their right to do, realize that they have assumed the responsibility for protecting me from criminal acts. If I am harmed in one of these establishments because I willingly left my firearm behind, thus restricting my ability to deal with a robbery or assault, they will be held responsible for the damages.
I can feel the quacking of fear at Fuddruckers all the way to my house.
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.
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.
