Question for our gun enthusiast friends.

domer76 said:
He wrote the majority opinion, dumbfuck. It’s law.

Where did you obtain your law degree?
Click to expand...

WRONG. An opinion is NOT a ruling. A ruling is NOT a law. Courts do not have the authority to write law. Courts do not have the authority to change the Constitution either. See Article III of the Constitution of the United States.
 
domer76 said:
The majority OPINION of Heller is clear.

How long have been a judge?
Click to expand...

No. He was writing an opinion. Scalia's reasoning behind the ruling (which is the opinion you keep harping on) is wrong. He does not have the authority to change the Constitution of the United States. The ruling itself did not try to. An opinion is NOT a ruling.
 
domer76 said:
He wrote the majority OPINION, stupid fuck.
Click to expand...
An opinion is not a ruling.
domer76 said:
It’s the opinion of 5 SCOTUS judges.
Click to expand...
No, it is his opinion only. 5 judges are not holding the pen.
domer76 said:
It IS the ruling.
Click to expand...
No. It is an opinion. The ruling is nothing more than deciding who wins the case.
domer76 said:
How many times does that have to be explained to you.
Click to expand...
Try English. It works better.
domer76 said:
One simply cannot possess any type of gun,
Click to expand...
Yes they can.
domer76 said:
in any manner,
Click to expand...
Yes they can.
domer76 said:
in any place,
Click to expand...
Yes they can, subject to property rights.
domer76 said:
and for whatever purpose.
Click to expand...
Yes they can.
domer76 said:
Try this dumbfuck. Go down to the local courthouse and try carry in your popgun. Let us know how that goes.
Click to expand...
The courthouse is owned and operated by the government. It's their property. Like anyone else, they have the right to bar guns on their property.
 
domer76 said:
It didn’t. It clarified portions of it.
Click to expand...

'Clarifying' it means changing it. The court does not have that authority. It doesn't even have authority to interpret the Constitution. I only has authority to interpret laws to see if they are in conflict with the Constitution. In those cases, they MUST rule according to the Constitution.
 
Into the Night said:
Guns in school IS an answer. Another answer is to allow teachers to lock the doors from the inside of their classrooms without requiring a key, and to use steel doors. Another answer is to install isolation steel drop slats that can be triggered on command from the school office.

Isolate the shooter, deprive him of targets in this way, and he will most likely kill himself, ending the situation. If he doesn't, he is rendered powerless until the police arrive.

It would also help to provide first training for type type of wounds a gunshot victim might suffer. The equipment required is slightly unusual, but is not expensive and can be applied by anyone with proper training. You could save a lot of lives that way as well.

In Utah, there ARE guns in the K-12 schools. Any teacher may carry a gun. The school system is not even allowed to ask if they carry or not. Utah is not alone, either. It works.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Utah, the land of funny underwear. How many school districts do you think have the funds to do those retrofits?

There are too many bullshit “if/woulds” in your post to even begin to address them.

Try dealing with reality for once.
 
Into the Night said:
WRONG. An opinion is NOT a ruling. A ruling is NOT a law. Courts do not have the authority to write law. Courts do not have the authority to change the Constitution either. See Article III of the Constitution of the United States.
Click to expand...

A SCOTUS decision IS an opinion. You can try to play words games but it doesn’t change the ruling/deision/opinion of Heller.

Guns have always been regulated and, for the most part, the courts have upheld those regulations.

Your ignorance of law is astounding
 
Into the Night said:
An opinion is NOT a ruling.
Click to expand...


Here is the “ruling”, dumbfuck . Scroll down to page 54. Read it and weep, fool.

It says:

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.



https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html
 
Last edited:
Into the Night said:
'Clarifying' it means changing it. The court does not have that authority. It doesn't even have authority to interpret the Constitution. I only has authority to interpret laws to see if they are in conflict with the Constitution. In those cases, they MUST rule according to the Constitution.
Click to expand...

You were homeschooled, weren’t you?
 
domer76 said:
You are really one stupid shitstain. What did you think I meant when I cited Heller?

Fucking illiterate idiot.
Click to expand...

You are really one stupid shitstain; because you haven't give a link to Heller?

Fucking illiterate idiot.

095ea45e2311cd42867eb1923bf858c3.gif
 
rjhenn said:
All you have to do is Google it. You have no proof that your wonderful gun control laws had any effect.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

He only wants you to provide the PROOF; because he knows that his comments are just based on conjecture and since he has nothing, he's hoping he can shred what you present.

:facepalm:
 
Into the Night said:
An opinion is not a ruling.

No, it is his opinion only. 5 judges are not holding the pen.

No. It is an opinion. The ruling is nothing more than deciding who wins the case.

Try English. It works better.

Yes they can.

Yes they can.

Yes they can, subject to property rights.

Yes they can.

The courthouse is owned and operated by the government. It's their property. Like anyone else, they have the right to bar guns on their property.
Click to expand...

Thanks for finally admitting that firearms can be restricted.

And take a look here, dumfuck. At the end of Heller. What word jumps out at you?

SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS, SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined.
 
Into the Night said:
Guns in school IS an answer. Another answer is to allow teachers to lock the doors from the inside of their classrooms without requiring a key, and to use steel doors. Another answer is to install isolation steel drop slats that can be triggered on command from the school office.

Isolate the shooter, deprive him of targets in this way, and he will most likely kill himself, ending the situation. If he doesn't, he is rendered powerless until the police arrive.

It would also help to provide first training for type type of wounds a gunshot victim might suffer. The equipment required is slightly unusual, but is not expensive and can be applied by anyone with proper training. You could save a lot of lives that way as well.

In Utah, there ARE guns in the K-12 schools. Any teacher may carry a gun. The school system is not even allowed to ask if they carry or not. Utah is not alone, either. It works.
Click to expand...

I wonder if domer or Stone can show how many school shootings occurred prior to the "Gun Free Zones" were put into place??

Unless such information would totally destroy their entire rantings and ravings.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
I wonder if domer or Stone can show how many school shootings occurred prior to the "Gun Free Zones" were put into place??

Unless such information would totally destroy their entire rantings and ravings.
Click to expand...

How many machine gun deaths have occurred?

What is the gun death rates in western cultures that have strict gun control?

Google Heller yet, lazy dumbass? P54-56:

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.”
 
StoneByStone said:
https://www.businessinsider.com/science-of-gun-control-what-works-2018-2

https://theweek.com/articles/629877/here-are-3-countries-where-gun-control-worked

https://www.businessinsider.com/does-gun-control-work-2018-2
Click to expand...
Fine, if all you're interested in is gun deaths and gun crime. A bunch of limited studies designed to support more gun control. As far as Australia is concerned, there have been multiple studies that show
no effect of the NFA. Australia saw a roughly 25% drop in their homicide rate from 1996 to 2007. So did the U.S.. So, unless you're going to argue that the NFA affected U.S. crime rates, you're left with nothing. Similarly the UK's homicide rate was 0.96/100,000 in 1900. In 2000 it was 1.71/100,000. Some improvement!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top