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.
If what you say is true, then how has the Gun Control Act of 1968 withstood constitutional tests?
It's never had any.
Quote:
The National Firearms Act (1934) clearly regulates certain firearms.
And it was found unconstitutional in about 20 minutes when it was brought before a Federal court.
Then it went to the Supreme Court, where the anti-gun prosecution showed up, but nobody from the defense did. So the prosecution recited several lies into the record, which got rubber-stamped into an Opinion since no one was there to debunk them.
The Feds have avoided any further Federal court actions like the plague, relying on the incredible windfall they got with the NFA case and the lies that became Case Law by default.
With all due respect, you may want to consider going back and read all the responses.
I really don't think it is your business WHY WOULD THEY be carrying it. Somebody's freedom is actually somebody else's tolerance. Because of paranoid folks like you, people like us have to give up on our 2rd amendment right. I don't think it is fair. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself, You won. In my state, carrying UNLOADED gun in pubic is considered illegal, I really don't know what you are arguing or worrying about.
That's not the case. Why would anybody object to somebody taking their gun to the range or taking it in for service? If that's illegal in your state that is nonsense.
I'm talking about people who stroll around in public places with a gun on their hip. That is provocative and foolish. People have no way of knowing whether it's loaded or not, but the obvious assumption is that it is.
Can anyone come up with anything besides, "yelling 'fire' in a crowded theater" as their example? Surely if there many restrictions, we can show more than one.
Great point!
Something rarely noted is that the 'fire in a crowded theater' line coined by Justice OW Holmes came up in a case against Charles Schenk in 1919. Schenk was a socialist and anti-war activist who was arrested for distributing anti-war pamphlets. The court upheld his arrest and conviction. Schenck v. United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So the 'fire in a crowded theater' example was nothing more than a red herring in this case. Schenk had been arrested over anti-war pamphlets, not for shouting 'fire.' More often than not, the example continues to be used as a red herring.
. Why would anybody object to somebody taking their gun to the range or taking it in for service? If that's illegal in your state that is nonsense.
.
Okay, now we have reached an agreement.
Burning American flag is protected by first amendment right.
Carrying an unloaded gun in public in my state is considered illegal. (It doesn't matter they taking their guns to the range or taking the guns in for service. Doesn't mater.)
This is the point of my thread. Double standard when it comes to 1st and 2rd amendment right.
gizmo980 - You make too much sense for this forum.
Haha... I know, reasonable/logical arguments without personal attacks are a rarity on P&OC. I'll try harder next time.
Quote:
I support the Constitution in its entirety. I support the Right of Free Speech so long as the speaker takes responsibility of what they say. Publically threating some one is a simple assault in front of witnesses. It is also dumb. I support the Right to be armed so long as it does not apply to people who have proven to be or are incapable of being responsible for their actions. I speak of children, convicted violent felons and the medically confirmed insane.
I believe the ban in CA of carrying an exposed firearm is a simple triumph of the squirrel people over common sense. If someone is openly carrying a pistol it just may make a criminal realize this is not going to be a one sided mugging but may become a gunfight. Gunfights have losers. Most criminals are breaking the law for money and really do not want to risk their life knocking off a convenience store for a few hundred bucks.
Yeah, these are pretty much my thoughts too. Our rights are never 100% without restrictions, whether we're discussing guns or booze or whatever else... so why is it that people tend to focus most on this one (second amendment)? Are they only going to be happy with completely UNBRIDLED and unregulated gun rights? I'm pretty sure that wasn't what the Founding Fathers had in mind, and of course, our society is much different today than it was back then.
Burning American flag is protected by first amendment right.
Carrying an unloaded gun in public in my state is considered illegal. (It doesn't matter they taking their guns to the range or taking the guns in for service. Doesn't mater.)
This is the point of my thread. Double standard when it comes to 1st and 2rd amendment right.
Not really, since there are many examples (some given on this thread) of how free speech has its restrictions & exceptions too... and in most cases, these are justified by explaining how the restricted actions might cause harm to others. So I'm failing to see the double standard here, regardless of whether I agree with your actual positions.
Not really, since there are many examples (some given on this thread) of how free speech has its restrictions & exceptions too... and in most cases, these are justified by explaining how the restricted actions might cause harm to others. So I'm failing to see the double standard here, regardless of whether I agree with your actual positions.
Sure there are double standard.
Burning American flag causes no damage, no harm to the general public, so it is protected by the first amendment right. I am annoyed by it, but I can do nothing about it.
Carrying UNLOADED gun in public causes no damage, no harm to the general public, and it is NOT protected by second amendment right. A person who carries unloaded gun in public can be punished for up to 1 year in county mail. Now mind you, they passed this new law in year 2012. So 2rd amendment right is really up to change without notice.
If you cannot see the double standard here, I don't know what to tell ya.
By the way, careless smoking can cause fires, careless flag burning can cause fires too. So I really doubt playing fire (burning flag) is really 100% safe. But it seems like it really doesn't bother anybody. Shrug.
Carrying UNLOADED gun in public causes no damage, no harm to the general public, and it is NOT protected by second amendment right.
Huh?
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.
