jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Don't you hate having the tables turned on you?
If you'd read Roe and Casey you'd understand that you're wrong.
The Attack on the 2nd Amendment Continues
- Thread starter Hacker15e
- Start date
Don't you hate having the tables turned on you?
If you'd read Roe and Casey you'd understand that you're wrong.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
I have read Roe and Casey. That's why I support a Constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion. The right to privacy should not extend to a right to kill human life in privacy.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
The SCOTUS says you're wrong.
What was it that you were saying about supporting some decisions but not others?
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
You must have read right past the words "support a Constitutional amendment." I don't dispute the SCOTUS's ruling. They're the experts, and I yield to their interpretation of the Constitution as it is written. That is why I support changing it.
It sure would be nice if the gun phobics would be as ethical and simply support a repeal of the 2nd Amendment rather than trying to violate it at every turn.
Murdoughnut
Well sized member
Can't stomach the ethical priorities of some of you anymore. Murdoughnut is taking an indefinite hiatus from JC. God speed to each of you.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Enjoy.
Cazadores
Well-Known Member
This gun owner does. I point out the logical inconsistency of voter ID laws and the general anti big government hysteria among my faux news watching coworkers often.
The anti gun control arguments sound very much like the anti voter ID arguments, an I agree with them both.
It is difficult for them to get their heads around it.
I fear people like me, who believe in marriage equality, the right to choose, voter access and increased opportunities for higher education, being forced to set any progress in these areas aside in the fight against gun control.
Sadly neither side troubles themselves it seems with consistency from one issue to another. So why are so many who trumpet the rights of gay marriage, choice, voter rights, so eager to legislate their opinion of others legitimate need when it comes to firearms ownership?
Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
The problem with this sarcasm is that it assumes that all "gun owners" (or even RKBA proponents, for that matter) are conservatives -- which is inherently false, of course.
Regardless, I find in hilarious that there is a large group of voters/legislators on one end of the political spectrum who believe that it is perfectly "rational" and "common sense" to register, license, and/or require insurance to keep and bear a firearm and exercise an enumerated Bill of Rights right (and such schemes are known to be, and regaled as, an encumbrance), but it is an "encumberance" in a bad way to show ID to exercise the right to vote, which is not on the Bill of Rights.
Both ends of the political and philosophical spectrum have serious inconsistencies in their dogma, which is why I dislike them both equally.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
Bob Ridpath
Pit Bull love
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
You mean like the 24th amendment? You don't think that requiring a certain ID would not be viewed as a tax?
Because I'd sure say it is.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
I'd say the same thing about any type of firearms registration or FOID system.
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
In all honesty, dude, I don't understand this.
The entire objective of discussion isn't to surround yourself with people who agree with everything you have to say. If that were the case, we could simply speak to ourselves in the mirror and listen to the echo of our own speech.
People who have differing opinions are the ones who need to speak to each other the most. JC has some of the most diverse opinions of any forum I participate in, and that's one of the reasons I really love it.
I strongly disagree with lots of folks on here -- but I've also had dinner and a beer with several of those folks, love 'em to death, and am looking forward to doing it again with them someday.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Even though the SCOTUS in Heller said reasonable regulations are allowable?
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
That statement refers to the numerous restrictions to the 2nd Amendment (NFA 1934, primarily, but also GCA 1968) that were all ready part of law when the case was being decided. Clearly, they did not want the wording of the ruling to overturn those laws. The reference to the M-16 in there is a clear point out to NFA 1934.
So, no, I don't agree that Heller implies that registration and FOID are constitutional, no. I do believe that such measures are quite similar to the poll tax.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
I think we're going to find out, and I'll wager that you're wrong.
That being said, I think the AWB will be found to be unconstitutional.
This gun owner does. So there.
Go buy a gun and be like me. But don't get a modern sporting rifle. Not because they're evil, but because they cost too damn much.
greaper007
Well-Known Member
You think it's hard to carry a gun? In 86% of us counties there are no abortion providers, 3 states only have 1 provider. Counter that with places to buy guns and ammo, you can get those in some convience stores in rural areas.
I don't want to get into an abortion debate, but it is legal yet terrorists have essentially outlawed it in many areas. The same thing isn't happening to gun owners and providers.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2009/06/02/no-choice-87-of-us-counti_n_210194.html
I don't want to get into an abortion debate, but it is legal yet terrorists have essentially outlawed it in many areas. The same thing isn't happening to gun owners and providers.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2009/06/02/no-choice-87-of-us-counti_n_210194.html
Hacker15e
Who am I? Where are my pants?
On which part? You think that registration will be legislated, and/or that it will be found constitutional IAW Heller?