Is There Any Chance Christie Did NOT Know About the Dirty Tricks?

oralloy wrote:

Whatever. You're evil. That you object to me posting facts.... Meh. That doesn't bother me nearly as much as the horror I feel whenever I see one of your posts.

Ossobuco is not evil. She's a very nice lady.

Oralloy, your use of the word "evil" in this particular context cheapens its meaning.

(However, I must admit that a certain frequent one-sentence expression of yours actually makes me chuckle. )

SO, by stating that the points that Scalia ADDED to the majority opinion, because they were not the focus of the litigation, DONT EXIST??
(playing theme song from Twilight Zone).
Youre an ex lawyer, you don't think that Scalias USSC writing would be entered into fact should some case be forwarded?

Its a fact, please don't, as Oralloy, deny away its existence. Youre smarter than that .

We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority in the Heller decision. “But,” he added, “the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table.”

Still, the Heller decision contained a long list of laws and regulations that would, be unaffected. Among them were “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools.”

“Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill,” Justice Scalia wrote. Government buildings in general could still ban guns. And the court said it had no quarrel with “laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

Justice Scalia added that laws banning “dangerous and unusual weapons” are “another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms.” He gave an example: “M-16 rifles and the like.”

When the case was argued in 2008, Justice Scalia suggested that other kinds of weapons and ammunition could be regulated. “I don’t know that a lot of people have machine guns or armor-piercing bullets,” he said. “I think that’s quite unusual.”

I said it was a dictum.

This is part of the case, which I guess you have not read.

oralloy wrote:

The NRA is not the gun manufacturers. The NRA is the moderate branch of the gun rights lobby.

You've had too much kool aid. Follow the money.

The following comes from Wikipedia.

"The courts have upheld most of these laws as being constitutional.[75] The basis for the lower court rulings is the paragraph near the end of the Heller ruling that states:
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions on the commercial sale of arms.[76]"

well, maybe reading comp is an acquired skill with you.

you tried, you lost. Im gonna watch tv, you can sit and get all steamed up

well, maybe reading comp is an acquired skill with you.

Nah. It's more that Justice Scalia did not say anything even remotely like what was claimed.

Advocate wrote:

The following comes from Wikipedia.

"The courts have upheld most of these laws as being constitutional.[75] The basis for the lower court rulings is the paragraph near the end of the Heller ruling that states:
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions on the commercial sale of arms.[76]"

Nothing in there saying that all gun control is Constitutional.

Nothing in there saying that all gun control that someone characterizes as "reasonable" is Constitutional.

Perhaps if you guys looked in the imaginary part of the ruling?

oralloy wrote:

Advocate wrote:

The following comes from Wikipedia.

"The courts have upheld most of these laws as being constitutional.[75] The basis for the lower court rulings is the paragraph near the end of the Heller ruling that states:
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions on the commercial sale of arms.[76]"

Nothing in there saying that all gun control is Constitutional.
Nothing in there saying that all gun control that someone characterizes as "reasonable" is Constitutional.
Perhaps if you guys looked in the imaginary part of the ruling?

You are quibbling.

Can't you, for once, admit you were wrong.

The following comes from Wikipedia.

"The courts have upheld most of these laws as being constitutional.[75]

The basis for the lower court rulings is the
paragraph near the end of the Heller ruling that states:
Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding
prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill,
or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as
schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions on the
commercial sale of arms.[76]"