Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

  1. #1
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    (snip)"Answering a 217-year old constitutional question, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to have a gun, at least in one’s home. The Court, splitting 5-4, struck down a District of Columbia ban on handgun possession. Although times have changed since 1791, Justice Antonin Scalia said for the majority, “it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.”

    Examining the words of the Amendment, the Court concluded “we find they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weaons in case of confrontation” — in other words, for self-defense. “The inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right,” it added.

    The individual right interpretation, the Court said, “is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment,” going back to 17th Century England, as well as by gun rights laws in the states before and immediately after the Amendment was put into the U.S. Constitution.

    What Congress did in drafting the Amendment, the Court said, was “to codify a pre-existing right, rather than to fashion a new one.”

    Justice Scalia’s opinion stressed that the Court was not casting doubt on long-standing bans on carrying a concealed gun or on gun possession by felons or the mentally retarded, on laws barring guns from schools or government buildings, and laws putting conditions on gun sales.

    The Court took no position on whether the Second Amendment right restricts only federal government powers, or also curbs the power of states to regulate guns. In a footnote, Scalia said that the issue of “incorporating” the Second into the Fourteenth Amendment, thus applying it to the states, was “a question not presented by this case.” But the footnote said decisions in 1886 and 1894 had reaffirmed that the Amendment “applies only to the Federal Government.” Whether the Court will reopen that issue thus will depend upon future cases.

    The Court in essence demolished the most recent precedent on the Second Amendment — the ruling in U.S. v. Miller in 1939, relied upon heavily by advocates of gun control (and by the dissenting Justices on Thursday). The opinion tartly remarked: “It is particularly wrongheaded to read Miller for more than what it said, because the case did not even purport to be a thorough examination of the Second Amendment.”

    In District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), the Court nullified two provisions of the city of Washington’s strict 1976 gun control law: a flat ban on possessing a gun in one’s home, and a requirement that any gun — except one kept at a business — must be unloaded and disassembled or have a trigger lock in place. The Court said it was not passing on a part of the law requiring that guns be licensed. It said that issuing a license to a handgun owner, so the weapon can be used at home, would be a sufficient remedy for the Second Amendment violation of denying any access to a handgun.

    While the declaration of the individual right was clear-cut, as was the decision’s nullification of key parts of the Washington, D.C., law, the Court did not lay down a standard for judging the constitutionality of any other federal laws — an omission that the dissenters attacked strongly. Even so, the opinion made it clear that, whatever ultimate test emerge, it probably would be a tough one to meet, at least when self-defense is at issue. As Justice Scalia put it, whatever remains for “future evaluation” about the strength of the right, “it surely elevates above all other interests the right of law-abiding responsible citizens to use arms in defense of hearth and home.”(snip)


    undoubtedly this will lead to future cases ... specifically cases challenging the authority of states to ban / restrict handguns for self-defense purposes.

  2. #2
    God/dess leilanicandy's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2005
    Location
    where they like American Boys
    Posts
    2,111
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Yea! I just got through reading the article. I agree with the supreme court. In London people are ban for having guns. Yet that dose not stop people. Who go around stabbing people. You should see how many murders, are in the Uk. The deaths are done more brutal. They done in other harsh premeditated and spare of the moment ways.

    Crazy people will kill. When they want too, banning guns do not maker it harder! It makes it more brutal-ly thought out and tragic.
    If you want the present to be differant from the past, study the past.
    Baruch Spindza

    It is what it is, not what you want it to become, that's important -- at least for now. Today, remember that things worth having are worth waiting for!
    The Stars

    Minds are like parachutes: They only function when open.
    Thomas Dewar

    Dont throw away the old bucket until you know whether the new one holds water.
    Swedish Proverb

  3. #3
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    well, that's not going to stop lots of US states and cities to try to hang onto their handgun 'bans' despite this Supreme Court ruling ...



    (snip)"An “outraged” Mayor Daley this morning denounced a U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Washington D.C.’s handgun ban as a “frightening decision” and a “return to the days of the Wild West.”

    Daley predicted that Chicago’s 1982 handgun freeze would be next in the crosshairs of the powerful gun lobby and that gun violence will surge if they’e successful.

    The mayor said he would vigorously defend Chicago's gun ordinance despite the Supreme Court's ruling and feels the decision will make it far more difficult to protect law-abiding citizens. (AP)

    The mayor said he would vigorously defend Chicago’s ordinance, in spite of what he called the dangerous precedent set by the nation’s highest court.

    “This is a very frightening decision for America. …Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society? If they think that’s the answer, then they’re greatly mistaken. Then, why don’t we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West? You have a gun and I have a gun and we’ll settle in the streets,” Daley told reporters at Navy Pier.

    “I have no problems with those hunting, gun collectors….But, how do you get a gun into your house? Does it fly in by a stork? You purchase a gun. You carry the gun in a car. You come to your home. And we’ve shown time and time again how many children have been killed in their homes by guns. Parents are away, they get the guns….The child takes the gun, runs out in the street, has an argument, comes back and shoots somebody.”

    At a time when Chicago’s homicide rate is rising by nearly 13 percent and children are being gunned down on city streets, Daley said the Supreme Court has “changed the rules” in a way that will make it far more difficult to protect law-abiding citizens.

    “The Supreme Court and Congress have no obligation to keep our country safe. It falls on the backs of mayors and local officials. That’s who say, ‘I want my street, my parks, my school, my church, mosque and synagogues — I want everything to be safe.’…They’re changing the rules….Why should we as a city not be able to protect ourselves from those who want guns in our society?” the mayor said.

    Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis today said that 75 percent of Chicago’s murders involve firearms. So far this year, Chicago Police have responded to 15,000 “man with a gun” calls and 27,000 calls of “shots fired.”

    “Today’s recent decision by the Supreme Court will have to be looked at by a lot of the lawyers to see how it truly will impact upon law enforcement,” Weis said at police headquarters. “However, if the result of this ruling are that more guns come on the street, it’s going to make it more challenging for law enforcement.”"(snip)


    hmmm, if Chicago's gun freeze was truly effective, I wonder where those 27,000 gunshots came from !

  4. #4
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by leilanicandy View Post
    You should see how many murders, are in the Uk.
    The murder rate in the UK is about 1/4 that of the US, per capita.

  5. #5
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Zeno View Post
    The murder rate in the UK is about 1/4 that of the US, per capita.
    Hasn't it always been around that with or without a gun ban?

  6. #6
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 117 Times in 78 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    There were more murders last year with the gun ban, than there were the year before they had the gun ban. A gun ban in a single city only takes the guns out of the honest people's hands.

  7. #7
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Deogol View Post
    Hasn't it always been around that with or without a gun ban?
    Beats me. I was clarifying a statement.

    Switzerland, with little gun control, has a lower murder rate, too (although not as low as the UK). Japan, with lots of gun control, has one of the lowest murder rates around.

    So how about we say that degrees of gun control will have different results for different culture, and the conclusions that you draw from one country doesn't necessarily translate to the next. We could also describe the U.S. murder rate as shameful compared to other First World countries, regardless of the reasons.

  8. #8
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by jester214 View Post
    There were more murders last year with the gun ban, than there were the year before they had the gun ban. A gun ban in a single city only takes the guns out of the honest people's hands.



    Violent crimes and property crimes were both down nationwide last year, according to a preliminary report on 2007 crime statistics released Monday by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

  9. #9
    Featured Member
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,030
    Thanks
    21
    Thanked 117 Times in 78 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Zeno View Post
    Crime Rates Down in 2007

    Violent crimes and property crimes were both down nationwide last year, according to a preliminary report on 2007 crime statistics released Monday by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
    I'm sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant in D.C. alone. There were 143 murders last year, and less than that before the hand gun ban was enacted.

  10. #10
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Well, to be clear, the law that was struck down was a 1975 or 1976 law. And the law was first struck down early last year, in March of 2007.

    In fact, in the last three years while the gun ban was in existence, 2004-2006, D.C. had a lower murder rate than 1969-1975, the years leading up to the gun ban. I'm not making a point here except that I wouldn't rely on these statistics to make an anti-gun argument, and I don't think they can be reliably used to make a pro-gun argument, either.

  11. #11
    God/dess leilanicandy's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2005
    Location
    where they like American Boys
    Posts
    2,111
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by jester214 View Post
    There were more murders last year with the gun ban, than there were the year before they had the gun ban. A gun ban in a single city only takes the guns out of the honest people's hands.
    I so agree with you Jester.

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    well, that's not going to stop lots of US states and cities to try to hang onto their handgun 'bans' despite this Supreme Court ruling ...

    http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/1...062608.article

    (snip)"An “outraged” Mayor Daley this morning denounced a U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning Washington D.C.’s handgun ban as a “frightening decision” and a “return to the days of the Wild West.”

    Daley predicted that Chicago’s 1982 handgun freeze would be next in the crosshairs of the powerful gun lobby and that gun violence will surge if they’e successful.

    The mayor said he would vigorously defend Chicago's gun ordinance despite the Supreme Court's ruling and feels the decision will make it far more difficult to protect law-abiding citizens. (AP)

    The mayor said he would vigorously defend Chicago’s ordinance, in spite of what he called the dangerous precedent set by the nation’s highest court.

    “This is a very frightening decision for America. …Does this lead to everyone having a gun in our society? If they think that’s the answer, then they’re greatly mistaken. Then, why don’t we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West? You have a gun and I have a gun and we’ll settle in the streets,” Daley told reporters at Navy Pier.

    “I have no problems with those hunting, gun collectors….But, how do you get a gun into your house? Does it fly in by a stork? You purchase a gun. You carry the gun in a car. You come to your home. And we’ve shown time and time again how many children have been killed in their homes by guns. Parents are away, they get the guns….The child takes the gun, runs out in the street, has an argument, comes back and shoots somebody.”

    At a time when Chicago’s homicide rate is rising by nearly 13 percent and children are being gunned down on city streets, Daley said the Supreme Court has “changed the rules” in a way that will make it far more difficult to protect law-abiding citizens.



    Chicago Police Supt. Jody Weis today said that 75 percent of Chicago’s murders involve firearms. So far this year, Chicago Police have responded to 15,000 “man with a gun” calls and 27,000 calls of “shots fired.”




    hmmm, if Chicago's gun freeze was truly effective, I wonder where those 27,000 gunshots came from !


    It came from the police. You should have seen how many people was kill by the police. Half of those people was innocent. Chicago is known for their corrupt police department. I believe this is why we have the second amendment. Who want to put their lives in the hand of a corrupt police department. What gets me is Mayor Dailey has the nerves to say it will go back to the 'wild west". Not everyone can get a gun license . You have certain rules about carrying the guns. Besides you can have hand guns in the suburbs and the skirts of Chicago. Which is where most of the police choose to own homes in.
    If you want the present to be differant from the past, study the past.
    Baruch Spindza

    It is what it is, not what you want it to become, that's important -- at least for now. Today, remember that things worth having are worth waiting for!
    The Stars

    Minds are like parachutes: They only function when open.
    Thomas Dewar

    Dont throw away the old bucket until you know whether the new one holds water.
    Swedish Proverb

  12. #12
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    ultimately the actual effectiveness of handgun 'bans' (or lack thereof) is now a moot point in D.C. at least. The Supreme Court has decided / confirmed that gun ownership is in fact a basic right of all Americans. It will now be a 'tall mountain to climb' for states and cities to try and take away that right !!!

    Believe it or not, another recent Supreme Court decision (re Gitmo prisoners) will actually work against state and city handgun laws. The reason of course is the shift in position from 'prior restraint against an assumed negative outcome' to 'presumption of innocence until a negative outcome is proven'. Thus, other than the limits spelled out in the Supreme Court ruling allowing the denial of gun ownership to convicted felons, to those with a documented history of mental illness etc., it is going to be extremely difficult for any state or city gov't to tell a homeowner / shopkeeper / worker who does not have a felony conviction or a history of mental illness that they can't purchase and carry a handgun !


    also, the NRA didn't waste any time challenging Chicago's handgun 'ban' ...



    (snip)"The 5-4 ruling specifically struck down a ban on handguns in Washington, D.C. The court ruled that the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns is incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment.

    The decision goes further than even the Bush administration wanted, and leaves most gun laws intact, but could invalidate Chicago's.

    Chicago has a similar ban on handguns and within minutes of the high court's ruling, the Illinois State Rifle Association began the court fight to get Chicago's ban overturned as well.

    In Chicago, unless your gun was purchased before the ban went into effect in 1982, it is illegal to possess a handgun within city limits. Only police officers, aldermen and a handful of others are exempt from the ban. While other firearms can be registered, under current law, handguns cannot be registered and are considered illegal.

    But gun rights advocates hope to change that. The Illinois State Rifle Association filed a lawsuit with just that purpose in mind at 9:15 a.m.

    "We want to overturn this ban. It's pretty onerous. It takes the right of self-defense away from every Chicago citizen," said Richard Pearson, director of the Illinois State Rifle Association.

    The National Rifle Association also plans to file lawsuits in Chicago and several suburbs, as well as San Francisco, challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.

    Illinois State Sen. Kirk Dillard said at least one-third of the households in his hometown, Hinsdale, have guns, one of the highest percentages in the state. He hailed the Supreme Court decision, saying, "I think the ruling today is good news. The criminals have guns, but law-abiding citizens should not have their rights jeopardized."

    As pleased as Dillard and other suburban Republicans in DuPage County were with the Supreme Court ruling, in Chicago it was a very different story among top democrats.

    Mayor Daley, a proponent of strict gun control laws, wasn't happy about the Supreme Court ruling, calling it "a very frightening decision."

    "If they think that's the answer ... they're greatly mistaken. Then why don't we do away with the court system and go back to the Old West, you have a gun and I have a gun, and we'll settle it in the streets if that's they're thinking."

    "It is frightening that America loves guns," the mayor said, "and to me, I think this decision really places those who are rich and those are in power, they'll always feel safe. Those who do not have the power do not feel safe, and that's what they're saying. If you're elected officials, you feel safe. You cannot carry a gun into a federal building. You cannot carry a gun into a federal court. So they're setting themselves aside, and really, they're saying to the rest of America that the answer to all the constitutional issues is that we can carry guns. And I just don't understand how they came to this thinking."

    Gov. Rod Blagojevich said, "the decision of Supreme Court today is very scary and it's a big blow to those of us who believe in common sense gun laws … so they ain't always right and on this case, they're wrong again."

    Some experts said the Supreme Court left room for local handgun controls in Chicago and suburbs such as Morton Grove and Oak Park, to survive, but only after a significant rewrite.

    Gun control activists Pam and Tommie Bosley hope strict gun control laws stay in place. They have been on a door-to-door anti-violence crusade ever since their 18-year-old son Terrell was shot and killed leaving a South Side church two years ago.

    "We doin' it for these guys, the little guys and for you all, that's why we're out here I can't bring my son back," Tommie Bosley said as he lobbied neighbors on the South Side.

    Pam Bosely said, "We protected him as much as we could, but as you say, he's not here, so with the guns out on the streets, there's no way you can save and protect your children."

    Tommie Bosely said, "I think what's going to end up happening ultimately is you're going to have private citizens who are not equipped to use handguns taking the law into their own hands."

    But gun rights supporters say that's exactly what some people are forced to do already -- defend themselves -- and guns can help them do that.

    Alan Gottlieb, of the Second Amendment Foundation in the state of Washington, told reporters that Chicago's handgun ban has failed to stop violent crime.

    That has been one of the mantras of the gun lobby."(snip)

    ~

  13. #13
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    "An armed society is a polite society" -Robert A Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  14. #14
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    It's a nice saying, but outside of Switzerland, I'm puzzled for examples. Or the implications. "I must be polite, or I'll get shot." It doesn't sound appealing. I liked Heinlein. Didn't think he was always right.

    But back on topic. One interesting thing, I think, as a result of the ruling is removing the "slippery slope" argument against gun control laws. Clearly, the Court is allowing a level of gun control legislation, but they are affirming a basic, inviolable right of the Second Amendment. So the argument, "Once they start limiting my gun rights, they'll come and take away my gun," is rendered moot.

  15. #15
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    ^^^ basically, the Supreme Court didn't ADDRESS the issue of state and local gun control legislation, other than specifically stating that gun ownership is an 'enumerated right', stating that forfeiture of that right involves a reasonably high standard of proof (i.e. convicted felon, documented history of mental illness), and stating that certain public locations could be designated as gun free zones i.e. courtrooms, schools, public buildings.

    I suspect that the proper scope of state and local gov'ts powers to limit gun ownership / carrying a gun in a privately owned home or business will be the primary outcome of the upcoming lawsuits against the City of Chicago, City of Sacramento etc. Another aspect mentioned in the Supreme Court decision involves the issue of unequal treatment of different classes of firearms by states and cities (in the context of strict prohibitions against handguns), which is likely to also be an issue in these upcoming lawsuits.

  16. #16
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    and of course New York is ripe for a challenge as well, since the bulk of NY handgun law is based on judges rulings such as ...

    (snip)"But his claims that the bar on nonresident permits violated the Second Amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" and the Privileges and Immunities Clause were dismissed by Northern District Judge Norman A. Mordue.

    Mordue held that Bach could not allege a constitutional right to bear arms because the "Second Amendment is not a source of individual rights." And the Privileges and Immunities Clause was not violated by the permit rule, he said, because "the factor of residence has a substantial and legitimate connection with the purposes of the permit scheme such that the disparate treatment of nonresidents is justifiable.""(snip)

    and perhaps more importantly ...

    (snip)""Although the sweep of the Second Amendment has become the focus of a national legal dialogue, we see no need to enter into that debate," Wesley said. "Instead, we hold that the Second Amendment's 'right to keep and bear arms' imposes on only federal, not state, legislative efforts."

    In so holding, Wesley said the 2nd Circuit was joining five other circuits, and it was following the lead of the U.S. Supreme Court in Presser v. Illinois, 16 U.S. 2252 (1886), which he said "stands for the proposition that the right of the people to keep and bear arms, whatever else its nature, is a right only against the federal government, not against the states.""(snip)

    from

    Thus a key question to arise from any of these state / city lawsuits will be an attempted challenge to the Supreme Court's enumerated right ... i.e. that while the bearing of arms may now be a federal right, it isn't necessary a right in regard to a state !!!

  17. #17
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Zeno View Post
    Beats me. I was clarifying a statement.

    Switzerland, with little gun control, has a lower murder rate, too (although not as low as the UK). Japan, with lots of gun control, has one of the lowest murder rates around.

    So how about we say that degrees of gun control will have different results for different culture, and the conclusions that you draw from one country doesn't necessarily translate to the next. We could also describe the U.S. murder rate as shameful compared to other First World countries, regardless of the reasons.
    I agree the acceptance of using violence seems more cultural than access to weapons.

  18. #18
    God/dess Deogol's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    5,493
    Thanks
    120
    Thanked 50 Times in 35 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    Thus a key question to arise from any of these state / city lawsuits will be an attempted challenge to the Supreme Court's enumerated right ... i.e. that while the bearing of arms may now be a federal right, it isn't necessary a right in regard to a state !!!
    I think that is a little bit of a straw man.

    Otherwise, having segregated drinking fountains would not be against the federal civil rights laws as at the time there were states OK with that.

    The 2nd amendment is a bit more base to the legal system than a "mere" federal law.

  19. #19
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    ^^^ I can only respond with 'yes, but !' In the case of segregation those states that supported it were in the minority as well as the recipients of massive negative media coverage. In the case of handgun 'bans', those states that support bans are probably in the majority as well as the recipients of massive positive media coverage.

    Personally speaking, I have no doubt that the 14th Amendment will be called on in a future case to 'incorporate' the Federal right to bear arms upon state legal authority as well, just as it was in the case of segregation. However, unlike segregation, the mainstream media and the politicians of many prominent states (because of their large cities and large gun violence problems) will fight tooth and nail.

  20. #20
    Veteran Member LadyLuck's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    521
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    This will probably surprise of few of my fellow debaters but I think this was a good decision. It secures the right to own personal defense and hunting weapons but with regulation and limitiations. A very moderate point of view.

    I also believe that the various regualtion and limitations should be mostly a local and State's rights issue.
    There never was a good war or a bad peace.

    Benjamin Franklin

  21. #21
    God/dess
    Joined
    May 2006
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    2,420
    Thanks
    36
    Thanked 291 Times in 210 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by LadyLuck View Post
    This will probably surprise of few of my fellow debaters but I think this was a good decision. It secures the right to own personal defense and hunting weapons but with regulation and limitiations. A very moderate point of view.

    I also believe that the various regualtion and limitations should be mostly a local and State's rights issue.
    I'll tell you, LL, for all your defense of positions that are (IMO) indefensible, I still think there is a chance you'll see the light. You're not a lost cause yet, LOL. For someone who seems to be insightful, I just don't see how you can allow yourself to be sucked into the illusion.

    My advice is to keep looking critically at everything presented to you by the left. Barring an unwillingness to evaluate BHO's propositions, you'd have to become an ally of Melonie, Jester, and me.
    "never trust a big butt and a smile"-- Bell Biv DeVoe

    If you're in your twenties and aren't a liberal, you have no heart. If you're in you're forties and aren't a conservative, you have no brain - Winston Churchill

  22. #22
    Member
    Joined
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    56
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jay Zeno View Post
    It's a nice saying, but outside of Switzerland, I'm puzzled for examples. Or the implications. "I must be polite, or I'll get shot." It doesn't sound appealing. I liked Heinlein. Didn't think he was always right.
    A few examples. The violent crime rate in the UK is almost triple what it is in the US. The UK has a total ban on handguns. States with concealed carry laws have a lower incedence of violent crime than states without. The DC area, with the handgun ban in place, was consistently near the top of the list for homicides. "Polite" is a bit simplistic but succinct.

  23. #23
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    I don't know violent crime rates, nor how different countries may define "violent crime" differently. I know that the homicide rate is much lower in the UK. And the UK would ordinarily be considered to be a polite society. Japan, with its gun ban, is a very polite society, by reputation and when I've been there.

    I'll repeat that using gun ownership/crime statistics of various countries can really lead to contradictory conclusions, or at least conclusions that can pander to one's own advocacy.

  24. #24
    God/dess
    Joined
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    2,993
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked 12 Times in 11 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by bem401 View Post
    For someone who seems to be insightful, I just don't see how you can allow yourself to be sucked into the illusion.

    My advice is to keep looking critically at everything presented to you by the left. Barring an unwillingness to evaluate BHO's propositions, you'd have to become an ally of Melonie, Jester, and me.
    Pot, kettle, black.

  25. #25
    God/dess
    Joined
    May 2006
    Location
    Rhode Island
    Posts
    2,420
    Thanks
    36
    Thanked 291 Times in 210 Posts

    Default Re: Another important US Supreme Court decision was released today ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard_Head View Post
    Pot, kettle, black.
    As always, I invite you to show me where my positions are wrong. Saying "you're wrong" or "everybody knows" or "Bush sucks" are hardly ways to win debates.
    "never trust a big butt and a smile"-- Bell Biv DeVoe

    If you're in your twenties and aren't a liberal, you have no heart. If you're in you're forties and aren't a conservative, you have no brain - Winston Churchill

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 06-12-2011, 03:05 PM
  2. Supreme Court Decision upholding 'free speech'
    By Melonie in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-26-2010, 04:51 AM
  3. Daytona Beach-Supreme Court Decision
    By laplover69 in forum Club Chat
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-25-2008, 04:50 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-15-2005, 03:01 PM
  5. Supreme Court decision
    By Jay Zeno in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-30-2003, 03:49 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •