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.
I see, thanks for the insight. It's pretty corrupt how the judges decide to uphold only 85 percent of a law.
It's not so much that they purposely decide to only uphold 85% (or whatever) of a law.It's because the constitution itself is so often vague that there isn't complete agreement on what it says.
The second amendment is a classic example.While you might think it's clear that it gives every individual the right have weapons there are plenty of lawyers,judges and constitutional experts who would argue that that is an incorrect interpretation.It references a vague "right to bear arms" but it doesn't explicitly say "the right to carry a weapon at all times".You might argue that it's right to assume that it means this or it means that but others will argue that it's totally improper to assume that it means or says anything.
Some argue that the "right to bear arms" applies only to organized militias and not to individuals.Again,since amendment itself is unclear is it proper for anyone to assume anything either way.
Law is never really settled.All it takes is a majority of a supreme court to interpret something differently and then a whole law can be reversed or thrown out.50 years later,another court majority can go back to a previous interpretation or come up with another whole new one.It's always in flux to a certain degree.There is no guarantee whatsoever that abortion might not become illegal at any moment,that prohibition couldn't come back or that laws against blacks and white intermarrying couldn't be re instituted.It really just depends on the mood/sentiment of the times.
So,they can't be totally rigid because the more rigid they are the more likely there will be challenges to the interpretation and the faster a law could get overturned.
Why stop at guns for all to solve our gun violence problem? Road rage/ maniac driving is also a major issue in this city.
But if we all drove battle-tanks, we’d be so much more respectful to each other. War-tanks chuggin down the streets are clearly the answer!
Yea, finding parking is gonna get tough, but just think how peaceful the city will be without all the honking.
It’s just an inconvenience I’m willing to take for a safer and quieter city.
No, I think that if everyone had a tank, there'd be the same level of disrespect. But more damage when the inevitable collisions occur. Also, think about how much more it would cost the city to re-pave the streets; tanks are hell on asphalt!
It's not so much that they purposely decide to only uphold 85% (or whatever) of a law.It's because the constitution itself is so often vague that there isn't complete agreement on what it says.
The second amendment is a classic example.While you might think it's clear that it gives every individual the right have weapons there are plenty of lawyers,judges and constitutional experts who would argue that that is an incorrect interpretation.It references a vague "right to bear arms" but it doesn't explicitly say "the right to carry a weapon at all times".You might argue that it's right to assume that it means this or it means that but others will argue that it's totally improper to assume that it means or says anything.
Some argue that the "right to bear arms" applies only to organized militias and not to individuals.Again,since amendment itself is unclear is it proper for anyone to assume anything either way.
Law is never really settled.All it takes is a majority of a supreme court to interpret something differently and then a whole law can be reversed or thrown out.50 years later,another court majority can go back to a previous interpretation or come up with another whole new one.It's always in flux to a certain degree.There is no guarantee whatsoever that abortion might not become illegal at any moment,that prohibition couldn't come back or that laws against blacks and white intermarrying couldn't be re instituted.It really just depends on the mood/sentiment of the times.
So,they can't be totally rigid because the more rigid they are the more likely there will be challenges to the interpretation and the faster a law could get overturned.
Right...well in that case, maybe it would be better if the "right to bear arms" becomes a state issue instead of a federal one. Seems that's the direction we are heading for anyway.
If you're going to quote random statistics to make your point, you should at least provide a link to them. I'd really like to read those stats about Canadian vs US violent crime rates because they don't make any sense.
Also, no one is arguing that criminals will respect gun laws. What Bloomberg has always stated is that lax gun laws in the South result in legally purchased guns making their way into New York where they are resold to criminals. That's a completely different argument and one that the pro-gun lobby loves to ignore.
************************************************** **********
What Bloomberg (a Liberal Republican) and his ilk Do NOT understand and even if they did they would never admit it is that the Second Amendment was written to guarantee the PEOPLE would have weapons to defend their self, not just against criminals but foreign invaders and tyrannical rulers. Using the standards of the Founding Fathers Bloomberg would be one of the tyrants that the PEOPLE need protection from. Any elected official, Law Enforcement Officer, Judge or Government worker that supports gun controls is a Domestic Enemy of the citizens. Citizens that support and believe in gun control are just fools, a right guaranteed by the First Amendment. The former are guilty of treason.
When actual MISUSE of weapons (not just firearms) are prosecuted zealously we might start bringing our crime back under control. I would support a mandatory 20 years to life for anyone that uses a weapon to commit a crime. Just possessing a weapon should NOT be a crime UNLESS that weapon has been stolen and the one possessing it KNOWS that.
Get rid of the ignorant and violent people first, the root of the problem.
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.
