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.
Stevens was a conservative appointment, but as the court pulled further to the right, he became more aligned with the liberals. Without any doubt, his position on the 2nd Amendment is as far from conservative as it could be. That said, the people who are belittling him, because of his age or his politics, should bear in mind his dissent on Citizens United. A relatively recent decision that shows his legal acumen was not impaired by age or anything else, and I believe his dissent will in the end carry the day, because the Citizens United decision was deeply flawed.
Surely, somewhere on the route to nuclear weapons a civilized society needs to draw the line between civilian weapons and military weapons.
Where should the line be drawn?
Unfortunately this is really the only way to prevent tyranny. Do you think if the general public had tanks, rocket launchers, nukes, etc, and were wiling to use them against the govt, that govt would be enacting and creating tyrannical laws/ regulations/ HECK NO!!
And since the courts have decided to infringe...what do you know, they are creating and enacting tyrannical laws! LOL Of course thats going to happen.
Who says that the liberals don't want to take away guns? Now we have a retired Supreme Court Justice calling for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment, calling it "a relic of the 18th Century".
They are screaming he was appointed by a conservative. My response to that is - this just proves most "conservatives" in DC aren't ANYTHING "conservative" - there are very few true conservatives in DC (or anywhere in America today) anymore.
Moreover, I want liberals to answer me this: If Trump is a puppet of a foreign government, or is as bad an tyranical as Hitler, like many of you say (and you said this same sort of stuff about Bush, McCain and Romney, let's not forget) WHY IN THE WORLD SHOULD WE GIVE THEM OUR GUNS???
Stevens was a conservative appointment, but as the court pulled further to the right, he became more aligned with the liberals. Without any doubt, his position on the 2nd Amendment is as far from conservative as it could be. That said, the people who are belittling him, because of his age or his politics, should bear in mind his dissent on Citizens United. A relatively recent decision that shows his legal acumen was not impaired by age or anything else, and I believe his dissent will in the end carry the day, because the Citizens United decision was deeply flawed.
Only in the sense of convention used by political talking heads.
Gun proliferation fueled by a tangential interpretation of the 2nd amendment has become a public safety threat to each and every man, woman, and child. Only the most narrow and closed minds refuse to acknowledge this and only those would stand in the way of doing something about it.
This is an issue where partisan division is senseless. There is nothing more important to real conservatives than safe streets, movie theaters, shopping malls, and - most of all - safe schools for their children.
The courts already determined that guns can be restricted, the world has changed.
True, but there are LIMITS on the restrictions, like not banning weapons in COMMON USE. The AR-15 is the definition of common use, as it is the most popular rifle in the U.S. by a wide margin. You can't just restrict and regulate away the Second Amendment.
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.