57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 22 Jan, 2019 05:23 pm
Kavanaugh!!!

Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green Mr. Green
Quote:
In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to have a handgun at home for self-defense. Two years later, the justices made clear that this right also applies against state and local governments. Since then the Supreme Court has repeatedly declined to say anything more about how far states and cities can go in restricting gun rights, but today it granted a plea to weigh in, this time in a case from New York City.

The request for review came from the New York State Pistol and Rifle Association and a group of gun owners who live in the city. They were challenging the city's ban on transferring even licensed, unloaded guns anywhere outside the city limits -- including to a weekend home or shooting range for target practice -- restrictions they describe as "draconian." After the lower courts rejected their challenge and upheld the restrictions, the NYSPRA and gun owners went to the Supreme Court.

Today the justices granted review in the case, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. New York. The Supreme Court's calendar for April was already full before last week's conference, so the new grant likely won't be argued until the fall. The justices' eventual ruling in the case could stick to the relatively narrow question of whether the city's law is constitutional, or it might shed light on a broader and more consequential question: whether the right to have a gun extends outside the home. Either way, the court's opinion in the case probably won't come until the spring of 2020.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2019/01/justices-to-review-new-york-gun-rights-case/
RABEL222
 
  3  
Reply Tue 22 Jan, 2019 06:05 pm
@oralloy,
I thought you said this was already decided by you before the s c with your 170 IQ.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 22 Jan, 2019 06:10 pm
@RABEL222,
I never said that I decided the case. Scalia was the one who wrote the Heller ruling.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Thu 24 Jan, 2019 03:37 am
A gunman has killed five people at a bank in Florida, police say.

Quote:
They say officers responded after a man called police from inside the SunTrust bank in the town of Sebring and said: "I have shot five people".

The gunman - named as Zephen Xaver, 21 - had barricaded himself in the branch, forced people to lie on the floor and began shooting, according to police.

He surrendered after officers stormed the bank. The motive for the shooting remains unclear.

The incident took place just after 12:30 (17:30 GMT) at SunTrust Bank in Sebring, about 80 miles (130km) south of Orlando. Police say they were the only five people in the bank at the time.

"This horrific incident shocks and angers me more than anything I have encountered in my career," said local sheriff Paul Blackman.

SunTrust CEO Bill Rogers said in a statement the company was "deeply saddened by the tragic shooting".

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said the suspect is "an individual who needs to face very swift and exacting justice".


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46981092

Can't help thinking it's got something to do with this.

Quote:
The SunTrust Foundation has given to Urban League, a member of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, an anti-NRA organization. According to the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, “The insurrectionist ideology promoted by the NRA and other pro-gun groups is corrosive to the democratic values and institutions that protect the freedoms we enjoy as Americans.”


https://www.2ndvote.com/suntrust-bank-cuts-ties-with-benham-brothers/

So typical of the thuggish NRA to murder those who disagree with their disgusting ideology. There is no place in a democracy for a far right terrorist group that glorifies mass murder, that's what the NRA is, and that's what it does.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 24 Jan, 2019 11:45 am
@izzythepush,
Quote:
There is no place in a democracy for a far right terrorist group

What do you think Islam is? You saying anything like that is laughable.
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 06:53 am
The sheriffs resisting Washington's new gun laws: 'I'm not going to enforce that'
Quote:
In Washington state, a freshly implemented ballot initiative and a raft of new bills may produce some of the tightest firearms regulations in the US. But standing in the way is a group of rural law enforcement officers who say point blank that they won’t enforce any of it.

The Klickitat county sheriff, Bob Songer, is one of them. He told the Guardian that the initiative passed last November “is unconstitutional on several grounds. I’ve taken the position that as an elected official, I am not going to enforce that law”.

Songer also cited ongoing litigation by the National Rife Association gun industry lobby and others which aims to demonstrate the laws violate both the second amendment and the state’s constitution. He also said that if other agencies attempted to seize weapons from county residents under the auspices of the new laws, he would consider preventively “standing in their doorway”.
... ... ...
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 09:42 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Yep. Most Americans value civil liberties.
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  4  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 11:04 am
@Walter Hinteler,
If the sheriff refuses to obey or enforce the laws, he will be removed from office.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 11:07 am
@glitterbag,
Oh? Who is going to do that?
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 11:14 am
@oralloy,
God? The Washington State Patrol? The FBI?

I, xxx do solemnly swear that I am a citizen of the United States of America; that I will support the Constitution and laws of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington; .... so help me God.
vikorr
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 02:43 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
If the FBI (or whoever) isn't standing there beside them while they are doing their job, when they happen to come across ###, how is the FBI ever going to know, or ever going to prove it even if someone did tell them?

It's almost impossible to disprove what a person did and did not see. Almost the same as how impossible it is to prove whether or not someone remembers something or not.

I get they should, but the reality is likely going to end up very different.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 05:45 pm
Quote:
At least five people have been killed in separate shootings in two parishes in the US state of Louisiana, officials say.

Police are searching for the suspect, 21-year-old Dakota Theriot, who fled in a gray and silver Dodge pick-up truck.

He is said to be armed and believed to be heading to the neighbouring state of Mississippi.

Authorities believe the two shootings are connected. Two of the victims were the suspect's parents.

America's gun culture in 10 charts
On Saturday morning local time, police were called to a trailer park in the city of Gonzales, 25 miles (40km) south of Baton Rouge, for a "domestic incident", Ascension Parish Sheriff Bobby Webre said.

When they arrived, they found two people who had been shot but were still alive. They have been identified as Elizabeth and Keith Theriot, both 51 years old.

They told the officers that their son was the shooter. The suspect had been told recently to leave their house.

The couple were taken to a hospital in Baton Rouge where they later died.

Reports suggest the gunman first killed three other people in neighbouring Livingston Parish.

The victims were not relatives of the suspect but appeared to know him. They have been identified as Billy Ernest, 43; Summer Ernest, 20; and Tanner Ernest, 17.

The suspect is wanted for first-degree murder, illegal use of weapons and home invasion.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-47017821
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 06:28 pm
@vikorr,
vikorr wrote:
If the FBI (or whoever) isn't standing there beside them while they are doing their job, when they happen to come across ###, how is the FBI ever going to know, or ever going to prove it even if someone did tell them?
The FBI would not trouble the sheriff and his deputies even if the events happened right in front of them.

FBI agents might choose to enforce that law themselves, but they would not take any actions against the sheriff and his deputies for not enforcing that law.

And, it should be noted, the Supreme Court will soon have all of these unconstitutional gun laws off the books.
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 26 Jan, 2019 11:01 pm
@coldjoint,
Quote:


Re: izzythepush (Post 6781034)
Quote:
Quote:
There is no place in a democracy for a far right terrorist group


What do you think Islam is? You saying anything like that is laughable.


Peter McLachlan, author of "Easy Meat", says that there is nothing unusual about Rotherham i.e. that you could simply multiply the stats you read for Rotherham by the number of incorporated places in England, i.e. that much of an entire generation of English women who should be raising their own children now, are simply missing in action due to the muslim grooming gangs.

Clearly, neither Theresa May nor izzythep... give a rat's ass about that.

Then again, there is the history of all the urgent "Britain needs guns alarms which came out as WW-2 started to ramp up and all the ship loads of US hunting rifles and surplus military rifles which went over there, allegedly to prevent limeys having to stand there with, as Santino Corleone so elequently put it, just their dicks in their hands as the Wehrmacht hit the English beaches.

In my estimation, the British simply got lucky. Adolf Hitler was a goofball who had a baker's dozen ways to win WW-2 and only two or three ways to lose it and he found one of the ways to lose. And, naturally enough, when the show was over, the British government confiscated all those US small arms and melted them down. That is a major part of why, when giant numbers of English girls are being groomed, raped, and pimped out by muslim grooming gangs, all the British can do is stand there with, as Santino Corleone put it, just their dicks in their hands.....

If there is any help in this picture to be had for the English people, it will most likely come from the East. Vladimir Putin cannot afford to have to deal with a nuclear armed Western European or British caliphate 20 years down the road...


0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 27 Jan, 2019 01:16 am
Santino Corleone:

Quote:
I don't want my brother commin outta there with just his dick in his hand...


0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  3  
Reply Sun 27 Jan, 2019 02:22 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Oh? Who is going to do that?


The legitimate legal authority (You know, the law)
glitterbag
 
  4  
Reply Sun 27 Jan, 2019 02:32 am
@oralloy,
Good thinking. I bet the IRS would refuse to collect taxes of any law breaking elected official who refused to collect taxes/or pay taxes. I know that Oral is keen on the 2nd amendment.......but so is all of the rest of the country. It's a little sad that she thinks that elected people will swear to protect and serve the American people then violate the law they have sworn to uphold. Tsk tsk tsk, I truly hope Oral is not as immoral/disloyal as she thinks others might be.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Sun 27 Jan, 2019 09:54 am
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:
The legitimate legal authority (You know, the law)
That would be the sheriff and deputies who are not going to help the left violate people's civil liberties for fun.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Sun 27 Jan, 2019 09:56 am
@glitterbag,
glitterbag wrote:
I know that Oral is keen on the 2nd amendment.......
Yes. Our civil liberties are what make America so much better than countries everywhere else in the world.

glitterbag wrote:
.......but so is all of the rest of the country.
That is incorrect. Most Democrats think it's fun to violate people's civil liberties.

glitterbag wrote:
It's a little sad that she thinks that elected people will swear to protect and serve the American people then violate the law they have sworn to uphold.
The sheriff and his deputies are not going to be violating any laws by doing this.
gungasnake
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 27 Jan, 2019 12:35 pm
The constitution was signed on condition that the bill of rights be included. Take any part of the bill of rights away, and particularly the second amendment, and the union itself loses its legitimacy. The second amendment is the lynch pin of the bill of rights, guaranteeing all items of that bill.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 6.49 seconds on 11/25/2024 at 04:24:00