The supreme court today

F

FUCK THE POLICE

911 EVERY DAY
It seems like they just got out their bag of goodies, took a look at the DC handgun ban, and said, well let's give the right a cookie. And then they looked at the death penalty case and said, well, the left has been on a dry run, might as well give them a boon to.

So everyones happy.

But the DC handgun ban being struck down was an atrocious act of judicial activism that interferes with democracy and is a dictatorship!
 
Watermark said:
It seems like they just got out their bag of goodies, took a look at the DC handgun ban, and said, well let's give the right a cookie. And then they looked at the death penalty case and said, well, the left has been on a dry run, might as well give them a boon to.

So everyones happy.

But the DC handgun ban being struck down was an atrocious act of judicial activism that interferes with democracy and is a dictatorship!
Click to expand...
STFU! Dork.
 
Where's that dude last night who was complaining about the court making constitutional decisions? I don't see him on here complaining about this decision on the second amendment.
 
Watermark said:
It seems like they just got out their bag of goodies, took a look at the DC handgun ban, and said, well let's give the right a cookie. And then they looked at the death penalty case and said, well, the left has been on a dry run, might as well give them a boon to.

So everyones happy.

But the DC handgun ban being struck down was an atrocious act of judicial activism that interferes with democracy and is a dictatorship!
Click to expand...
You are still as brain dead as a tree stump.

The dictatorship was the city of DC telling people they no longer have a 2nd amendment. The court says they cannot do that. And appropriately enough, they actually read the 2nd amendment to reach their decision. They can actually point to the wording in the Constitution and say "See, it says right here: 'The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.'"

Like wise the decision on detainees can pont to a specific place in our constitution (the 14th amendment) and say "See, it says right there 'nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...'"

This is unlike many other constitutional decisions where it is asked "where does it say that?" and the answer is "Well, it does NOT say that specifically, but that is what we think they MEANT to say."
 
ib1yysguy said:
Where's that dude last night who was complaining about the court making constitutional decisions? I don't see him on here complaining about this decision on the second amendment.
Click to expand...
Of course you won't see people who support the Constitution complain. Unlike many former decisions, this one is actually based on what it says, and not on what the judges think it should say.
 
ib1yysguy said:
Where's that dude last night who was complaining about the court making constitutional decisions? I don't see him on here complaining about this decision on the second amendment.
Click to expand...

He came on last night, complained that the death penalty decision was an act of undemocratic dictatorial judicial activism, and then in another thread congratulated the court on Heller.
 
Yay, we still have a second amendment. It was looking like the ban on quartering of troops during peacetime/restrictions on wartime quartering of troops was going to become the new 2nd Amendment. Well, if they ever strike down the 3rd Amendment, as a troop I hope they stick me in a condo with a bunch of hot chicks.
 
Good Luck said:
Of course you won't see people who support the Constitution complain. Unlike many former decisions, this one is actually based on what it says, and not on what the judges think it should say.
Click to expand...

It says something about "militia" if I remember correctly. I didn't see anything in this decision addressing that. But that's also the part you guys like to ignore.

His contention, however, was that the court had no right to adjudicate anything constitutional.
 
Threedee said:
Yay, we still have a second amendment. It was looking like the ban on quartering of troops during peacetime/restrictions on wartime quartering of troops was going to become the new 2nd Amendment. Well, if they ever strike down the 3rd Amendment, as a troop I hope they stick me in a condo with a bunch of hot chicks.
Click to expand...

I hope they try to stick you with me, because I'm a gun owner and I won't let it happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top