Skip to comments.
Supreme Court barrier to Joe Biden’s gun grab
Washington Examiner ^
| April 9, 2021
| Nicholas Rowan
Posted on 04/09/2021 8:59:42 AM PDT by Mr. Mojo
While President Joe Biden pushes for stricter gun control regulations, the Supreme Court is considering several Second Amendment cases with potentially major implications for gun ownership.
The case comes before the court as Biden ramps up the pressure for legislative action on gun rights. On Thursday, Biden signed a series of executive orders regulating firearms, and the White House signaled that his actions were “just the beginning” of a crusade against gun violence.
At the same time, the Supreme Court is weighing whether it will take up two cases that could clarify the limits of the Second Amendment. The first looks at the constitutionality of licenses to carry concealed handguns. The second examines the rights of convicted felons to own firearms. The court has both cases scheduled for its next Friday conference and could decide whether to hear them this month.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2a; 2ndamendment; armedcitizen; banglist; rkba; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-112 next last
To: gundog
61
posted on
04/09/2021 10:43:56 AM PDT
by
Buttons12
( )
To: Mr. Mojo
At this point, I wouldn’t count on the Supreme Court to follow anything, let alone the U.S. Constitution.
62
posted on
04/09/2021 10:51:35 AM PDT
by
mass55th
("Courage is being scared to death, but saddling up anyway." ~~ John Wayne )
To: TexasGurl24
You are a moron, and obviously not a supporter of the 2nd Amendment, but then, the two go together. '
I answered your question. The Constitution does not speak to the issue of WMDs at all, but as I said, it does speak to the issue of Letters of Marque, which implies something far beyond hunting rifles.
If you would like to amend the Constitution, there is a path spelled out in the very document to do so. You could probably garner quite a bit of support to the concept of banning WMDs from private posession.
63
posted on
04/09/2021 10:52:14 AM PDT
by
zeugma
(Stop deluding yourself that America is still a free country.)
To: TexasGurl24
Your question is moot. If Joe developed that power and being a sociopath then the 2nd A becomes irrelevant. If he used the weapon and eliminated 99% of the population then the Constitution becomes a dead document surpassed by the whims of a sociopath. By the way, anti-matter already exists. Harnessing it so it doesn’t annihilate matter is the problem.
The issue isn’t that he can create the weapon. The issue is his intent. If you know that his intent is to kill others then the 2nd A doesn’t apply. In affect, his intent would be the overthrow of a Constitutional government.
64
posted on
04/09/2021 11:00:32 AM PDT
by
Purdue77
To: ClearCase_guy
The Second Amendment has no limits.
Sure it does. Just not to direct violations of its text, such as arms capable of bearing, as Biden describes.
A reasonable bound is arms which if, properly used, are no more likely to hit a target other than that which it is aimed at than a shotgun.
65
posted on
04/09/2021 11:02:30 AM PDT
by
lepton
("It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"--Jonathan Swift)
To: TexasGurl24
What a silly hypothetical question.
66
posted on
04/09/2021 11:03:00 AM PDT
by
Enten
(I don't have islamophobia...I do have islamonausea)
To: zeugma
it does speak to the issue of Letters of Marque, which implies something far beyond hunting rifles.And even today, even without a Letter of Marque, you can purchase a cannon for your boat. Or a field cannon for your home.
67
posted on
04/09/2021 11:10:49 AM PDT
by
SJackson
([Rome}A city for sale and doomed to quick destruction, if it should find a buyer, Gaius Crispus)
To: MinorityRepublican
Packing the court. Much simpler to just go full Andy Jackson.
68
posted on
04/09/2021 11:22:19 AM PDT
by
itsahoot
(The election was stolen and there isn't a dang thang you can do about it. )
To: SJackson
And even today, even without a Letter of Marque, you can purchase a cannon for your boat. Or a field cannon for your home.Quite true. That is as it should be.
I am completely baffled why gun orgs never mention Letters of Marque.
69
posted on
04/09/2021 11:23:21 AM PDT
by
zeugma
(Stop deluding yourself that America is still a free country.)
To: lepton
A reasonable bound is arms which if, properly used, are no more likely to hit a target other than that which it is aimed at than a shotgun.I'd have to disagree with the 'reasonableness' of that. A Gatling gun likely wouldn't qualify. Same for most canon. Ditto for explosives.
70
posted on
04/09/2021 11:41:18 AM PDT
by
zeugma
(Stop deluding yourself that America is still a free country.)
To: zeugma
A little esoteric for most people. And like real automatic weapons, cannons firing shells have to be registered with the ATF as do the shells. A favorite example of Biden ignorance from the campaign, From the very beginning you weren't allowed to have certain weapons. You weren't allowed to own a cannon during the Revolutionary War as an individual. I'll retract that if Joe acknowledges he considers England as the legitimate government of the colonies during the Revolution, though there's probably no specific law, they wouldn't have allowed private cannons. Or flintlocks.
71
posted on
04/09/2021 11:59:53 AM PDT
by
SJackson
([Rome}A city for sale and doomed to quick destruction, if it should find a buyer, Gaius Crispus)
To: TexasGurl24
I'm an absolutist. I think that inmates in federal penitentiaries should be denied guns. Inmates locked in to insane asylums should be denied guns. If someone is allowed to walk the streets, they should have a weapon without restrictions.
I will not quit the Second Amendment over a hypothetical anti-matter weapon. One can always come up with some hypothetical to justify tyranny -- "Hey, Hitler was right to try and kill all the Jews, because just imagine this situation ..."
Nope. I won't go there. I reject genocide, and I reject people who think the Second Amendment ought to contain a whole bunch of loopholes. I am an absolutist.
72
posted on
04/09/2021 12:08:10 PM PDT
by
ClearCase_guy
("I see you did something -- why you so racist?")
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Two words. John.
Roberts.
Yep. You gotta admit, the man enjoys his briefcases full of cash...
73
posted on
04/09/2021 12:09:22 PM PDT
by
COBOL2Java
(The avg 911 response time is 23 mins; the response time of a .357 is 1400 ft/sec)
To: Yo-Yo
What are the current soft rules for pistol brace length of pull?
Asking for a friend.
To: Mr. Mojo
75
posted on
04/09/2021 12:13:11 PM PDT
by
Dick Bachert
(THE DEEP STATE HATES US! IT DETESTS TRUMP!!)
To: napscoordinator
The SC should take THIS opportunity to rule the “Full faith and credit” clause in the Constitution applies to the 2A as well. Those lawful carriers in one state may behave similarly in other states - exactly how homo marriage was introduced nationally. Your driver’s license is good nationwide, so should your firearm license.
76
posted on
04/09/2021 12:20:50 PM PDT
by
Sgt_Schultze
(When your business model depends on slave labor, you're always going to need more slaves)
To: Mr. Mojo
The supreme court lol. The SCROTUS is useless, every single one throughout the country is a black-robed tyrant.
77
posted on
04/09/2021 12:41:43 PM PDT
by
wastedyears
(The left would kill every single one of us and our families if they knew they could get away with it)
To: econjack
Maybe someone should tell Joey that if he would just take the guns away from bad people this would be solved.
To: TexasGurl24
Whatever, the point was still valid and your argument was not.
To: zeugma
I never said what MY position was, clown. I posed a hypothetical to test the commitment. Morons don’t like tough questions because they don’t have the capacity to craft an intellectual defense of their position.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-112 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson