Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
I'm not a lawyer nor a politician, but, IIRC, the Supreme Court said otherwise.
More Guns
- Thread starter Lionfish
- Start date
And where did they say that?
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
There's several here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_firearm_court_cases_in_the_United_States
Which would you like them to overturn? With the outside chance of Clarence Thomas "retiring" early, it appears Trump's RW SCOTUS will control the gun laws for another decade or more. Too bad RBG fucked y'all by not standing down under Obama. LOL
Presser v. Illinois is a good one to discuss. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Presser-v-Illinois
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
The Supreme Court never ruled on Obama’s use of Social Security roles or the ban a on assault weapons, so I don’t know what you’re referring to.
What they DID rule on was Heller, which said you can have a traditional gun for self defense in the home, but does not give you the right to have any gun, any time, anywhere. Regulations ARE Constitutional.
The latest ruling about outside carry, I haven’t looked into enough yet to comment
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Again, not a lawyer or politician and you're the one who brought up Obama.
Agreed on Heller, not sure about the rest. Let the current SCOTUS rule on it.
It's legal in Texas and several other states. If a Big Blue City or state wants to ban it, let the current SCOTUS figure it out.
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
You're a retard. If you had brains you'd be dangerous, because you're retarded and malicious.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
^^^
Matt always becomes very, very angry when it's late and he's drunk. Sad.
A lifetime of drinking isn't healthy, Matt.
Matt Dillon
Semolina comes from wheat
^^^
Matt always becomes very, very angry when it's late and he's drunk. Sad.
A lifetime of drinking isn't healthy, Matt.
Fuck off, delusional retard.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Fuck off, delusional retard.
Matt, it's not rocket science to deduce you're an unemployed drunk when you're consistently drunk posting late at night on weekdays.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
If a person is intent on killing and they can't get a gun, then a machete, sledgehammer, chainsaw, car, or something else will get substituted. It isn't the tool that's the problem it's who's using it. Look at England. They eliminate guns. Knife crimes go up. They eliminate knives. Crimes using things like sharpened screwdrivers go up. The problem isn't the tool, it's the person using it.
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
Soooo... you want to ban everything people can do except the tools to murder each other, Terry?
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Ban? Bans rarely work. I would prefer something more effective. With guns there is something of a problematic issue with the 2nd Amendment. With currently illegal drugs, for example, I could see a licensing system put in place to allow for use. Something like this:
In order to use a particular drug like cocaine, heroin, or the like, you have to get a "drug abusers license." The license has a nominal fee for paperwork but is easily affordable. The license is public information--that is anyone can look up who's abusing drugs--and can be used as a reason to refuse to hire or terminate someone from a job. You agree in getting the license you are responsible for all debts incurred, including all medical expenses, resulting from your drug use.
Drug dealers and manufacturers are likewise licensed. The drugs involved are made to what is currently veterinary grade, again to keep the costs down and abusers are informed of that. That makes these drugs far safer than what they use now.
The abuser then goes to a licensed dealer, shows their license to abuse, and are sold the drugs they want to abuse. Dealers can also sell needles and other accessories for your drug abuse.
If you get caught outside this system--you are using without a license etc.--upon conviction you go to prison for decades on a first offense. The punishment is harsh to incentivize playing within the system. The disincentive is you need a public information license to use the drug and are now a "drug abuser." For many people this will be a huge problem. Since it would be hard to find anyone willing to sell you drugs illegally due to the penalty and the low cost of drugs in the legal system, you are pretty much forced into getting a license. Dealers and manufacturers will be all-too-willing to play by the system seeing legalization as safer and profitability as excellent within such a system.
For business and industry, knowing who's using and being able to deny employment or fire such a person means they can be more assured their workers aren't using meaning fewer drug tests, etc., lowering their costs. For many current users, being fronted off in public becomes a problem. They are faced with loss of status and employment if they continue to use.
Not perfect, but damn better than the current situation. Of course, that means you'd have to get your license to keep dropping LSD...
Dutch Uncle
* Tertia Optio * Defend the Constitution
You just proved your more of a Left-winging socialist than a Libertarian, Terry. Regulations? Licenses? Permits? That's the same shit the Lefties want to do with guns and anything else they don't like....just like you. LOL
Let's be honest, I understand the need for regulation and government oversight such as keep kids out of it, don't hurt others, respect the rules, etc. You and the other extremists, be they Left or Right, want your way or the highway with extreme measures for the slightest deviation. That ain't right.