Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

High court to look at ban on handguns
McClatchy-Tribune ^ | Nov. 9, 2007, 12:18AM | MICHAEL DOYLE

Posted on 11/09/2007 3:17:09 AM PST by cbkaty

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,181-1,2001,201-1,2201,221-1,240 ... 1,581-1,586 next last
To: Mojave
Millions of gun owners here. Thousands of stores and ranges.

Banning them one at a time is progress to you? You see... this is why most here label you a TROLL.

1,201 posted on 11/18/2007 5:53:35 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1195 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
Banning them one at a time is progress to you?

Who said anything about "progress"? Would your progressive scheme to impose a nationwide concealed carry ban in the name of the 2nd Amendment be an example of "progress"?

1,202 posted on 11/18/2007 5:56:21 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1201 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
That depends on whether you hold them to be part of the militia or not. And you're so ashamed of your position that you won't say.

You demand answers while refusing to answer any yourself.

1,203 posted on 11/18/2007 5:57:38 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1200 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

You say it depends on the answer to the question. How will the answer to that question affect the meaning of the Second Amendment? Please tell us.


1,204 posted on 11/18/2007 6:02:02 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1203 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

Answer it and find out.

Don’t be ashamed.


1,205 posted on 11/18/2007 6:07:57 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1204 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Not wasting my time with it.


1,206 posted on 11/18/2007 6:12:32 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1205 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
Would your progressive scheme to impose a nationwide concealed carry ban in the name of the 2nd Amendment be an example of "progress"?

How does ruling the Second an inalienable individual Right do that? As I stated, only active duty militia could be "regulated" in how they could carry arms. No general ban could be implemented.

Have you tried to get your carry permit in Cali? Unless you are politically connected... Good Luck. So much for your idiot "State laws" protecting sh&t...

Under an individual Right, you could tell Babs Boxer and DiFi to get bent...

1,207 posted on 11/18/2007 6:39:53 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1202 | View Replies]

To: Mojave

Trying to draw a corollary between law abiding gun owners and your pet Mara’s is a bit extreme. Even for a dirtbag like you.


1,208 posted on 11/18/2007 6:42:43 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1205 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
How does ruling the Second an inalienable individual Right do that?

The decision you're promoting explicitly excepts concealed carry from 2nd Amendment protection. You centralized government freaks are so transparent.

1,209 posted on 11/18/2007 7:06:32 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1207 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
The decision you're promoting explicitly excepts concealed carry from 2nd Amendment protection.

The question before the court is "collective" vs "individual" Right and if the Second can be used as a defense against such legislation.

Plainly, it can. The Second Amendment should be an affirmative defense in all cases regarding individual ownership and carry of arms. Regardless of which State, colony, or district of the US they live in. As it was designed to be.

You aren't even paying attention to the argument are you? You just read off the list of Brady approved arguing points... and go along your merry way.

1,210 posted on 11/18/2007 7:11:40 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1209 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
The question before the court is "collective" vs "individual" Right

And you're promoting the view that concealed carry is not an individual right under the 2nd Amendment and that it may be banned nationally, abrogating all state laws protecting that right.

If the dress fits, don't be afraid to wear it, Sarah.

1,211 posted on 11/18/2007 7:21:08 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1210 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

Twisting words is a critical job skill in DC. It’s been raised to an art form by the professionals.


1,212 posted on 11/18/2007 7:32:16 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1210 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
And you're promoting the view that concealed carry is not an individual right under the 2nd Amendment and that it may be banned nationally, abrogating all state laws protecting that right.

Well... I guess if you took everything I've ever said on the subject, and then reversed it 180 degrees... you could come to that conclusion.

I mean, seriously... how the gibbering f*ck do you come up with that? At all?

Listen... last time: The Second Amendment protects an inalienable, unalienable, un-infringable Right. If you are a GOVERNMENT paid military person, they can order how you wear your armaments. If you are a CIVILIAN not acting in an official capacity, you can wear what you want, how you want, without having to ask anyone else's permission. No one in either Federal or State government can tell you sh*t.

Now stop it already. Seriously. This is bordering on dementia on your part.

1,213 posted on 11/18/2007 8:14:34 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1211 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic

This isn’t “twisting”, this is twisted. This guy isn’t even as “smart” a troll as Bobby is. He’s like one of those kids back in grade school who thought his annoying behavior made him “cool”. In reality, the little booger-eater was the butt of every joke.


1,214 posted on 11/18/2007 8:16:04 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1212 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
gibbering f*ck

Pretty much all your posts in a nutshell.

The Second Amendment protects an inalienable, unalienable, un-infringable Right.

Federal preemption of state laws protecting concealed carry is a right? Maybe to you and Sarah.

1,215 posted on 11/18/2007 8:25:53 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1213 | View Replies]

To: Mojave
Federal preemption of state laws protecting concealed carry is a right?

The only "pre-emption" that could possibly take place would be overturning your beloved California gun bans.

Don't fear the freedom troll...

1,216 posted on 11/18/2007 8:27:28 PM PST by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1215 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse

Personally, I think the fact that he’s a former professional federal bureaucrat helps explain how DC, and the RKBA got in the shape it’s in. You don’t get ahead in that culture believing in limited government, and telling the truth. And you don’t spend a career there and just turn it off when you retire. He’s our own little piece of the beltway.


1,217 posted on 11/18/2007 8:28:19 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1214 | View Replies]

To: RamingtonStall

And furthermore, it should apply the 2nd Amendment to protect individuals from oppression by the states, using the 14th Amendment.


1,218 posted on 11/18/2007 8:32:43 PM PST by donmeaker (You may not be interested in War but War is interested in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
The only "pre-emption" that could possibly take place

Backed by your word.

[snicker]

1,219 posted on 11/18/2007 8:35:01 PM PST by Mojave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1216 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

My understanding is that Miller was dead, and his lawyer didn’t even get notified.

The fix was in, I tell ya.

Still, the SCOTUS knew that they were being railroaded, so they wrote in a few weasel words to make life difficult for the Roosevelt Administration in their attempts to use it as precedent. Important to know the time frame re: FDR’s court packing scheme.


1,220 posted on 11/18/2007 8:37:27 PM PST by donmeaker (You may not be interested in War but War is interested in you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,181-1,2001,201-1,2201,221-1,240 ... 1,581-1,586 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson