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)
 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,258,323 times
Reputation: 4937

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
I don't know why anyone would be interested in guns.
Competitive sport - there is even an Olympic event involving shooting

Hunting / hunting for food

Self protection and the protection of their loved ones

To name a few reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:09 AM
 
7,300 posts, read 6,732,593 times
Reputation: 2916
Quote:
Originally Posted by shooting4life View Post
They take precedent from previous rulings.

Anyways, if you are suggesting that the second amendment is the for the formation of a militia and since the militia is a an army of the people then American citizens should own any weapon that an individual soldier would have for the common defense of the homeland. That would include fully automatic rifles, rocket launchers, etc.
If that were true and set in stone, that the SC is limited to their own precedents, can only build upon them, and is prohibited from making original decisions, the SC would not be dynamic, but utterly static, and we'd be back in the Stone Age.

The fact is, that the SC DOES rule DIFFERENTLY with new cases, when it deems that things have changed. The SC, in fact, has a lot of leeway. Proof of how much leeway they have is that is the fact that they chose to ignore the "MILITIA" reference in the Second Amendment in its entirety for their ruling, thereby ignoring an Amendment's language.

As I said, when they rule differently, against guns, don't come here whining.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:21 AM
 
46,281 posts, read 27,093,964 times
Reputation: 11126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
Oh but I've no doubt you're afraid! That goes with the right wing territory! That's the gas that runs the right wing machinery - fear and terror of anything noble, of anything compassionate, of anything with a conscience.

Right wingers worship at the altar of savagery, theft, authoritarianism, cruelty, corruption, racism, scapegoating, lies and propaganda, all wrapped up in a right wing burrito of "political correctness."
Of course, and all rapes start off with the gun already to hte head of the victim, right....just like women should just lay down and spread thier legs.....I'm mean tht is what you are stating....right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:24 AM
 
Location: MS
4,395 posts, read 4,911,481 times
Reputation: 1564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
Oh but I've no doubt you're afraid! That goes with the right wing territory! That's the gas that runs the right wing machinery - fear and terror of anything noble, of anything compassionate, of anything with a conscience.
Noble? What is more noble than taking care of MY family without any help from anyone else. Compassionate? What is more compassionate than giving to charity? It has been proven that conservatives give more to charity. Conscience?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
Right wingers worship at the altar of savagery, theft, authoritarianism, cruelty, corruption, racism, scapegoating, lies and propaganda, all wrapped up in a right wing burrito of "political correctness."
What savagery have conservatives been part of? It was a Democratic majority of the Supreme Court that imprisoned citizens without due process during WWII?

Theft - Who is stealing?

Authoritarianism - I thought we wanted LESS government.

Cruelty - Again, where?

Corruption - I'm sure you will go with the tax breaks for the rich or something. Those are tax LAWS. If they were so bad, why didn't Congress and the White House change them during this administration's first two years. With majorities in both houses, they could have changed this along with the gun laws. What were they afraid of?

Racism - Really? Examples. Post some links because if a group of people

Scapegoating - Where?

Lies - If I post something as fact, I link to a source. Otherwise I state it as opinion.

Propaganda - Facts you do not agree with are not propaganda.

Political correctness is the worst thing to happen to this country. It stifles free speech.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:35 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,820,687 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
If that were true and set in stone, that the SC is limited to their own precedents, can only build upon them, and is prohibited from making original decisions, the SC would not be dynamic, but utterly static, and we'd be back in the Stone Age.

The fact is, that the SC DOES rule DIFFERENTLY with new cases, when it deems that things have changed. The SC, in fact, has a lot of leeway. Proof of how much leeway they have is that is the fact that they chose to ignore the "MILITIA" reference in the Second Amendment in its entirety for their ruling, thereby ignoring an Amendment's language.

As I said, when they rule differently, against guns, don't come here whining.
They didn't ignore the militia, if you actually read DC V Heller they explain it well. I've posted it below, I hope you can understand it, maybe you should read it a few times so it can sink in.

The Supreme Court held:[43]

(1) The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.
(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause. The operative clause’s text and history demonstrate that it connotes an individual right to keep and bear arms. Pp. 2–22.
(b) The prefatory clause comports with the Court’s interpretation of the operative clause. The “militia†comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved. Pp. 22–28.
The Scalia majority invokes much historical material to support its finding that the right to keep and bear arms belongs to individuals; more precisely, Scalia asserts in the Court's opinion that the "people" to whom the Second Amendment right is accorded are the same "people" who enjoy First and Fourth Amendment protection: "'The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning.' United States v. Sprague, 282 U. S. 716, 731 (1931); see also Gibbons v. Ogden, 9 Wheat. 1, 188 (1824). Normal meaning may of course include an idiomatic meaning, but it excludes secret or technical meanings...."
District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:42 AM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,950,358 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saritaschihuahua View Post
Oh but I've no doubt you're afraid! That goes with the right wing territory! That's the gas that runs the right wing machinery - fear and terror of anything noble, of anything compassionate, of anything with a conscience.

Right wingers worship at the altar of savagery, theft, authoritarianism, cruelty, corruption, racism, scapegoating, lies and propaganda, all wrapped up in a right wing burrito of "political correctness."
Projecting now are we?

Funny, because I would say my position politically is more commonly libertarian (extremely limited government) and a "personal" conservative view (that means while I may agree with many conservative views, I don't believe in dictating them to others).

I find it ironic that you are in a thread demanding peoples 2nd amendment rights be violated while claiming those defending their right to be authoritarian. Do you even look up the definitions of the words you use or do you simply rant on unknowingly?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:44 AM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,950,358 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_J View Post
Noble? What is more noble than taking care of MY family without any help from anyone else. Compassionate? What is more compassionate than giving to charity? It has been proven that conservatives give more to charity. Conscience?

What savagery have conservatives been part of? It was a Democratic majority of the Supreme Court that imprisoned citizens without due process during WWII?

Theft - Who is stealing?

Authoritarianism - I thought we wanted LESS government.

Cruelty - Again, where?

Corruption - I'm sure you will go with the tax breaks for the rich or something. Those are tax LAWS. If they were so bad, why didn't Congress and the White House change them during this administration's first two years. With majorities in both houses, they could have changed this along with the gun laws. What were they afraid of?

Racism - Really? Examples. Post some links because if a group of people

Scapegoating - Where?

Lies - If I post something as fact, I link to a source. Otherwise I state it as opinion.

Propaganda - Facts you do not agree with are not propaganda.

Political correctness is the worst thing to happen to this country. It stifles free speech.
I think this is getting silly. He is just ranting on talking points now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 11:47 AM
 
Location: MS
4,395 posts, read 4,911,481 times
Reputation: 1564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
I think this is getting silly. He is just ranting on talking points now.
If you read my response, I just gave on one item. You can only refute allegations so many times.

I'm dropping out of this thread for a while to install a Yankee Hill Manufacturing low profile gas block. For you people not in the know, it's an evil piece of metal with holes drilled in it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 12:05 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
12,287 posts, read 9,820,687 times
Reputation: 6509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert_J View Post
If you read my response, I just gave on one item. You can only refute allegations so many times.

I'm dropping out of this thread for a while to install a Yankee Hill Manufacturing low profile gas block. For you people not in the know, it's an evil piece of assault metal with holes drilled in it to kill puppies and kittens.
I fixed it for you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2013, 12:06 PM
 
48,502 posts, read 96,848,488 times
Reputation: 18304
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmmjv View Post
Wouldn't you really be better of just getting the hell out of there?
Shhot out can be much longer even in police shootour ebcause of strees and not having exposure to aim as good when takig cavoer.lus there is often darkness in volved.Happns all the time has most practice on a firing range under no stress.Evcen the FBI in their study on adoptig another firearm made high capicty a priority i even goig from revlvers to automatics. Having a high capsicity magazine with reality of stress in self defense shows eve police are often bette nt ahving to reload even when they have magazines at hand readily. Most civilian train less under self defense conditions ';only in well lite areas and not under the stress of a actual confrntation. Often police run before shootig to allow that to be more real as to what stress does to a person regardless of now good a range shot they are. Anyone who has been in combat and beig shot at can tell you what sudden stress sitautions do to you.
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 07:18 PM.

© 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