Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > Gun Control/2nd Amendment
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Gun Control/2nd Amendment Discuss After nearly 10 years of ignoring it, SCOTUS accepts 2nd Amendment case! at the General Forum; Originally Posted by FrancSevin A good many anti possession arguments stand on the dubious interpretation of the phrase "well regulated ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 01-23-2019, 12:29 PM
Lumara's Avatar
Belly Dance Queen
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Great Smoky Mountains
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,659
Thanks: 3,590
Thanked 3,213 Times in 1,597 Posts
Default Re: After nearly 10 years of ignoring it, SCOTUS accepts 2nd Amendment case!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
A good many anti possession arguments stand on the dubious interpretation of the phrase "well regulated militia." Suggesting that the only purpose of the right to bear arms is to be part of the state militia. An archaic body seldom if at all currently employed by any state in the Union.
Penn and Teller did an excellent job explaining the wording of the 2nd Amendment:

__________________
If I had a dollar for every gender there is, I'd have two dollars and a bunch of counterfeits.

We bring people from sh*thole countries because sh*thole Democrats need sh*thole votes so they can turn America into a sh*thole.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Lumara For This Useful Post:
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 01-23-2019, 09:36 PM
Jeerleader's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Upper Bucks County, PA
Gender: Male
Posts: 889
Thanks: 743
Thanked 1,164 Times in 552 Posts
Default Re: After nearly 10 years of ignoring it, SCOTUS accepts 2nd Amendment case!

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrancSevin View Post
A good many anti possession arguments stand on the dubious interpretation of the phrase "well regulated militia." Suggesting that the only purpose of the right to bear arms is to be part of the state militia.
While we often see that line of "reasoning" regurgitated by leftists / statists arguing on political boards, it isn't represented in modern legal arguments used to defend gun control. The 9-0 Heller opinions re-affirming the individual nature of the right secured by the 2nd Amendment, has totally and finally invalidated 99% of these collective right theories.

The only snippet still flopping around is what's known as the "conditioned individual right" which says that yes, the right is individual but it can only be exercised when one is an active militia member. That theory is argued more from Congress' power to regulate the militia, not mutating the 2nd Amendment.

That last vestige been abandoned, now lower courts are bastardizing Heller ("in the home", "AR-15's and the like") and arguing for intermediate and rational basis standards of scrutiny.

The collective right theories are dead . . . We gun rights supporters should treat on-line loudmouths that just keep "well regulated militia" on a loop, like we treat kooky Flat Earther's" . . . With a giggle and a wave of the hand.

.
__________________
Allowing an illegal border crosser to stay in the US with amnesty and start the legal immigration process
is like allowing a bank robber to go free and keep the money as long as he fills out a loan application.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Jeerleader For This Useful Post:
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2019, 01:48 AM
Jeerleader's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Upper Bucks County, PA
Gender: Male
Posts: 889
Thanks: 743
Thanked 1,164 Times in 552 Posts
Default Re: After nearly 10 years of ignoring it, SCOTUS accepts 2nd Amendment case!

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
Thanks for posting this thread Jeerleader. This will be an interesting case that I hope is decided on the original intent of the 2nd Amendment.
In all honesty, for what it is worth to the question / issues in this case, enough "original intent" is explained in Heller and the application of the 2nd is established in McDonald. This case is narrow and the precedent is forceful enough to decide it.

In reality, I have accepted it is a good case to be heard right now, there is little risk because the law in question only impacts NY City. IMNSHO. the illegitimacy of the law is clear and there is a good opportunity for the majority to include a lot of guidance to lower courts (even if it's dicta) that will make the lower court's various creative interpretations of Heller much harder to justify.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
I already have an idea how our 4 left wing justices will vote, but I am curious as to how the other 5 rule. This case could and should, help dismantle a large number of onerous state laws meant to restrict law abiding citizens from exercising their Constitutional rights.
This case isn't that encompassing. I would like to see Alito write the opinion, his concurrence (Thomas joining) in the Per Curiam decision in Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U.S. ___ (2016) is promising legal scholarship, building on his majority opinion in McDonald v Chicago.

I had hoped that a significant 2ndA case would get to the Court well before 2020 and my wish was that Thomas would write it. I could see him submitting the decision and retiring -- just so Trump could name his replacement. He has been chomping at the bit to write a RKBA majority opinion and he would write a definitive, end all questions opinion. His concurrence in McDonald v Chicago is extraordinary, too bad it wasn't the majority opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
As we speak, my son is on his way to Maryland to live with his wife while he will be stationed a Andrews AFB. . . . He said he did some research and thought he would be ok, but took my advice and left them here until he gets a better feel for the laws.
Good decision. Maryland is bad, really bad. The wife shakes her head because whenever we drive from home in Eastern PA to her sister's in Greensboro NC, it always take an extra 1-1/2 hours each way because I go west to Route 220 so I only drive 8 miles through Maryland. I've heard too many horror stories about PA guys with a License to Carry Firearms getting pulled over for no reason and the Troopers ask, before they ask for a drivers license and registration, are there any guns in the vehicle.

I pull over before the MD state line, I take my holster off, unload all magazines lock all ammo in a box in the bed of the truck and lock the guns in a safe under the back seat . . . Drive 12 minutes through MD, (absolutely no stopping), and reverse the process when I cross into WV and carry like my home state the rest of my journey / visit. It is no joke.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
Its a shame that an active duty member of our military has to worry about possessing a firearm in one of the original 13 colony's. The founders should be turning over in their graves.
True but don't assume a blue state like MD (or NJ or NY or MA or CT) will ever respect any gun rights of anyone, state citizen or not, military or not.

They will only be forced to, kicking and screaming all the way, just like when Democrats were forced to give up their Slaves.

.
__________________
Allowing an illegal border crosser to stay in the US with amnesty and start the legal immigration process
is like allowing a bank robber to go free and keep the money as long as he fills out a loan application.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jeerleader For This Useful Post:
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 01-24-2019, 04:00 AM
jamesrage's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: A place where common sense still exist.
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,316
Thanks: 1,167
Thanked 1,370 Times in 858 Posts
Default Re: After nearly 10 years of ignoring it, SCOTUS accepts 2nd Amendment case!

Hopefully the pro-2nd amendment side is successful and the supreme court strikes down New York unconstitutional law. When that happens more lawsuits challenging states anti-2nd amendment laws need to occur so that this lunacy of states ****ting on the 2nd amendment can end.
__________________
"There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn’t an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag… We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language… and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people.”—Theodore Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2019, 02:23 AM
Jeerleader's Avatar
Counselor
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Upper Bucks County, PA
Gender: Male
Posts: 889
Thanks: 743
Thanked 1,164 Times in 552 Posts
Default Re: After nearly 10 years of ignoring it, SCOTUS accepts 2nd Amendment case!

On April 12th New York City communicated to the Court that it is moving to modify the regulations that make the transport of a handgun outside the city illegal. They want SCOTUS to suspend the case, to stop brief submitting and delay oral argument because if the regulation is changed, the case will be moot.

No doubt NYC realizes that theirs is a losing case and they want to avoid being the party that brings another step forward for gun rights.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...%2012%2019.pdf

.
__________________
Allowing an illegal border crosser to stay in the US with amnesty and start the legal immigration process
is like allowing a bank robber to go free and keep the money as long as he fills out a loan application.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jeerleader For This Useful Post:
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 04-13-2019, 06:37 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,807
Thanks: 9,327
Thanked 7,612 Times in 4,570 Posts
Default Re: After nearly 10 years of ignoring it, SCOTUS accepts 2nd Amendment case!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeerleader View Post
On April 12th New York City communicated to the Court that it is moving to modify the regulations that make the transport of a handgun outside the city illegal. They want SCOTUS to suspend the case, to stop brief submitting and delay oral argument because if the regulation is changed, the case will be moot.

No doubt NYC realizes that theirs is a losing case and they want to avoid being the party that brings another step forward for gun rights.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketP...%2012%2019.pdf

.
I wouldn't trust any political entity to honor an agreement outlining something the entity wants now in exchange for something to be named later. We've been there. We're still waiting.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
2nd, accepts, after, amendment, case, ignoring, nearly, scotus, years

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0