http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content ... 7-2901.pdf
More as time permits
Discuss
Toggle shoutbox
Shoutbox
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
D.C. v. Heller, 5-4 Decision, 2d Am. Right to a Handgun
Started by fishtheimpaler, Jun 26 2008 09:23 AM
21 replies to this topic
#3
Valerie Valens
-
- F3 Staff
- 768 posts
Ein Fahrender Ritter
- Gender:Female
- Location:HK, China
Posted 26 June 2008 - 01:12 PM
Hooo boy, here we go again...
#5
Valerie Valens
-
- F3 Staff
- 768 posts
Ein Fahrender Ritter
- Gender:Female
- Location:HK, China
Posted 26 June 2008 - 02:03 PM
QUOTE ("masterblaster":3vx39noz)
Put a sock in it, I'm just stating my opinion, no more, no less.
I wasn't talking to you. I am very much pro-gun ownership, but it is my experience that tells me that topics like this never accomplish anything but invite heated bickering. Hence the "Here we go again..." line.
#6
fishtheimpaler
-
- Fellow FUSer
-
- 336 posts
Fellow FUSer
Posted 26 June 2008 - 07:03 PM
Wow Valerie unnecessary strife follows you everywhere you go by accident
You are so unlucky
In other news, I think that the SCOTUS probably came to the right outcome in this case. Both the "militia" and private rights reading of the Second Amendment have some pretty compelling arguments for them, but the private rights reading just makes a tad more sense in light of the bald language of the text and its placement alongside other private rights in Amendments 1-8.
The majority opinion, however, has cemented Antonin Scalia's fall from grace in my mind. On such an obviously tight question his ridiculous effort to "sell the call" by calling the dissent a bunch of ridiculous jackasses is just stupid. If you're an ump it's one thing, but there aren't dissenting umpires to make all the points you want to leave out. It makes all his plain language rhetoric seem cheap in my mind; even if he's got a brilliant mind he doesn't want to have to bother showing it when he writes a tough opinion.
You are so unlucky
In other news, I think that the SCOTUS probably came to the right outcome in this case. Both the "militia" and private rights reading of the Second Amendment have some pretty compelling arguments for them, but the private rights reading just makes a tad more sense in light of the bald language of the text and its placement alongside other private rights in Amendments 1-8.
The majority opinion, however, has cemented Antonin Scalia's fall from grace in my mind. On such an obviously tight question his ridiculous effort to "sell the call" by calling the dissent a bunch of ridiculous jackasses is just stupid. If you're an ump it's one thing, but there aren't dissenting umpires to make all the points you want to leave out. It makes all his plain language rhetoric seem cheap in my mind; even if he's got a brilliant mind he doesn't want to have to bother showing it when he writes a tough opinion.
#7
John Roberts
-
- Admins
-
- 2,589 posts
It's a nativity scene, except nobody here is wise
- Gender:Male
- Location:Darwin, Australia
Posted 02 July 2008 - 01:38 AM
So, who's gonna be the first twat to start the "It's mah god-given right as an American to own a gun" line? Come on, I know one of you weirdos here is dying to say it.
I'm pro gun, I shoot for a living after all. I am against untrained, yahoo dickheads being able to own one however. There are some very basic weapon handling drills and safety precautions everyone should have to go through before owning one - otherwise you're just a fuckwit that deserves to shoot your own toes off.
I'm pro gun, I shoot for a living after all. I am against untrained, yahoo dickheads being able to own one however. There are some very basic weapon handling drills and safety precautions everyone should have to go through before owning one - otherwise you're just a fuckwit that deserves to shoot your own toes off.
6620
9:06
9:06
#8
chief
-
- Admins
-
- 6,487 posts
An7imatt3r was here =p
- Gender:Male
- Location:West Coast, BC, Canada
Posted 02 July 2008 - 11:35 AM
I'm with John on this one. There should also be restricted weapons and in my opinion you shouldn't be allowed to carry a hand gun everywhere you go. In Canada guns are all regestered. Hand guns are restricted weapons so you need to get a different licence for those then for rifles.
I think if you want a gun go for it if you get your stuff. But its not a right to own a gun. Its a privlage.
I think if you want a gun go for it if you get your stuff. But its not a right to own a gun. Its a privlage.
#9
Ratty Randnums
-
- Fellow FUSer
-
- 1,385 posts
He of Little Sleep
- Gender:Male
- Location:The Milky Way
Posted 02 July 2008 - 09:32 PM
QUOTE ("John Roberts":13zs848k)
So, who's gonna be the first twat to start the "It's mah god-given right as an American to own a gun" line? Come on, I know one of you weirdos here is dying to say it.
I'm pro gun, I shoot for a living after all. I am against untrained, yahoo dickheads being able to own one however. There are some very basic weapon handling drills and safety precautions everyone should have to go through before owning one - otherwise you're just a fuckwit that deserves to shoot your own toes off.
I'm pro gun, I shoot for a living after all. I am against untrained, yahoo dickheads being able to own one however. There are some very basic weapon handling drills and safety precautions everyone should have to go through before owning one - otherwise you're just a fuckwit that deserves to shoot your own toes off.
Completely agree, the policy of "let's just make it really hard to get one" with extensive waiting periods and stuff like that is stupid (though their should be some waiting periods and of course background checks etc.), the loony gun-nuts and psychos who really really want one will get one anyway, either by sticking it out or illegally, while this keeps some more casual persons from getting weapons for their own defense from sheer hassle and time consumption. However "gun's for everyone/it's my right/no restrictions" doesn't work either. You hit the nail on the head and I agree that the focus should be shifted from simply making it difficult, to ensuring that everyone who gets a gun knows how to use it and fully respects and understands what it can do.
QUOTE ("Chief":13zs848k)
There should also be restricted weapons and in my opinion you shouldn't be allowed to carry a hand gun everywhere you go. ...its not a right to own a gun. Its a privlage.
Yeah yeah you would say that, I know you're just sittin' up there waiting for a repeat of 1812 (Screw the Alamo, remember the white house!) ...I've got my eye on you!
To quote Moe Syzlak - (personal handguns/rifles are for) "...keepin' the king of England outta your face!"
"I really think of life as a great expression of joy. And if you take yourself seriously you're going to be defeated I'm afraid.
...Maybe that is the whole recipe of life, is to be in on the joke. Because life is a joke and if you're not in on it you're out.
But if you're in on it, you can make it." - Vincent Price
"What have you got to lose? You know you come from nothing you're going back to nothing. What have you lost? Nothing!"
- Eric Idle
...Maybe that is the whole recipe of life, is to be in on the joke. Because life is a joke and if you're not in on it you're out.
But if you're in on it, you can make it." - Vincent Price
"What have you got to lose? You know you come from nothing you're going back to nothing. What have you lost? Nothing!"
- Eric Idle
#10
The Man
-
- B&'ed
- 804 posts
Mind Bullets a.k.a. Telekinesis
- Gender:Male
- Location:Castle of clouds.
Posted 09 July 2008 - 10:42 AM
Who takes it literally? A right to a handgun but not the bullets?
You can own almost anything you want as long as you know how to use it/responsible enough, ect.,.
You can own almost anything you want as long as you know how to use it/responsible enough, ect.,.
#11
Guest_Red Sonic_*
Guest_Red Sonic_*
-
- GUESTS
Posted 28 July 2008 - 07:04 PM
QUOTE ("chief":1no7u43t)
But its not a right to own a gun. Its a privlage.
Well, Chief, here in the States it IS a right to own a gun. As in if someone who is legally capable of owning a gun wants to buy one, there is no law that says you can't.
Some Americians own rifles and shotguns because they hunt. I don't, but if they want to then so be it. Some own guns for personal protection and i understand this. If a man breaks into my house, I have every right to take that man's life so long as he stands on my property because he poses a real threat to me and the welfare of my family.
And yes, there are some gun-collecting nuts who just want to own an automatic weapon simply because they can. I don't see the sense in owning an Uzi, but it's not against the law. However, these courts don't really exist in a realm of reality, as the gun-control nuts scream over keeping those guns from walking around and killing people all by themselves, they fail to realize that gun-control laws are useless to people who--WHAT?--IGNORE THE LAW!
Frankly, if we didn't have the ability to own guns, we'd have more knife-killing or blunt-object killings, or death-by-baseball bat. People will find a way to kill someone if their head is set on it, the law doesn't mean much to a crazed moron who suddenly decides no one can have his ex-girlfriend but him.
#12
The Man
-
- B&'ed
- 804 posts
Mind Bullets a.k.a. Telekinesis
- Gender:Male
- Location:Castle of clouds.
Posted 28 July 2008 - 10:34 PM
Unless more important people get killed and/or shoot their eye out.
#13
Guest_Telgin_*
Guest_Telgin_*
-
- GUESTS
Posted 29 July 2008 - 07:28 PM
I'm far too uneducated on the intricacies of this debate, but I will point this out: people owning guns being a deterrent to theft and the like isn't a particularly good argument.
Burglars don't intend to get caught do they? They thus don't really consider the possibility of the house owner owning a gun. They don't intend for it to get to the point where bullets might get exchanged. Although I can't find the reference, I've read that a similar line of thought pervades most criminals: they don't consider any consequences very much before commiting crimes. They'll burglarize without much variability regardless of whether or not the owner might own a gun.
It is true that by outlawing guns, only the outlaws would own them though. How much of a bearing this has on real life though is questionable. Typical people don't carry guns into public or anything anyway.
Still, I agree that people should be allowed to own guns. That alone isn't a big deal, and plenty of people use them in legitimate situations (sport shooting, hunting, or whatever).
But, the debate is mostly about handguns, is it not? That's a much tougher debate, since handguns are more likely to be used in murder or criminal activity, and aren't particularly useful for things like hunting. But, outlawing them would only cut down on non-premeditated murder, since anyone who wants someone dead will get the gun anyway, or use an alternative legally acquirable method.
Ultimately, I don't see the benefits of outlawing guns or handguns outweighing the trouble that it causes. Of course, I probably just restated the entire thread... I started rambling a bit there without intending to even get into the debate proper.
Burglars don't intend to get caught do they? They thus don't really consider the possibility of the house owner owning a gun. They don't intend for it to get to the point where bullets might get exchanged. Although I can't find the reference, I've read that a similar line of thought pervades most criminals: they don't consider any consequences very much before commiting crimes. They'll burglarize without much variability regardless of whether or not the owner might own a gun.
It is true that by outlawing guns, only the outlaws would own them though. How much of a bearing this has on real life though is questionable. Typical people don't carry guns into public or anything anyway.
Still, I agree that people should be allowed to own guns. That alone isn't a big deal, and plenty of people use them in legitimate situations (sport shooting, hunting, or whatever).
But, the debate is mostly about handguns, is it not? That's a much tougher debate, since handguns are more likely to be used in murder or criminal activity, and aren't particularly useful for things like hunting. But, outlawing them would only cut down on non-premeditated murder, since anyone who wants someone dead will get the gun anyway, or use an alternative legally acquirable method.
Ultimately, I don't see the benefits of outlawing guns or handguns outweighing the trouble that it causes. Of course, I probably just restated the entire thread... I started rambling a bit there without intending to even get into the debate proper.
#14
The Man
-
- B&'ed
- 804 posts
Mind Bullets a.k.a. Telekinesis
- Gender:Male
- Location:Castle of clouds.
Posted 30 July 2008 - 01:37 AM
What last post said = throwing human self-servingness and irresponsiblity into the mix makes things more dangerous.
Shave with your razor, kids.
Shave with your razor, kids.
#15
chief
-
- Admins
-
- 6,487 posts
An7imatt3r was here =p
- Gender:Male
- Location:West Coast, BC, Canada
Posted 01 August 2008 - 03:20 PM
QUOTE ("Red Sonic":1q01c4oi)
QUOTE ("chief":1q01c4oi)
But its not a right to own a gun. Its a privlage.
Well, Chief, here in the States it IS a right to own a gun. As in if someone who is legally capable of owning a gun wants to buy one, there is no law that says you can't.
Some Americians own rifles and shotguns because they hunt. I don't, but if they want to then so be it. Some own guns for personal protection and i understand this. If a man breaks into my house, I have every right to take that man's life so long as he stands on my property because he poses a real threat to me and the welfare of my family.
And yes, there are some gun-collecting nuts who just want to own an automatic weapon simply because they can. I don't see the sense in owning an Uzi, but it's not against the law. However, these courts don't really exist in a realm of reality, as the gun-control nuts scream over keeping those guns from walking around and killing people all by themselves, they fail to realize that gun-control laws are useless to people who--WHAT?--IGNORE THE LAW!
Frankly, if we didn't have the ability to own guns, we'd have more knife-killing or blunt-object killings, or death-by-baseball bat. People will find a way to kill someone if their head is set on it, the law doesn't mean much to a crazed moron who suddenly decides no one can have his ex-girlfriend but him.
I didn't see this in till today but... Red you are (Im sorry to say this) dumb. what you just said is ANYONE can own a gun cause its their right. And sure ok it might be the yank way but hey lets sell guns to guys who have no idea how to use them? Lets sell guns to phyco's! Hey what the fuck its their right! What are you going to say when someone breaks into your house and kills you and your family cause he just bought a gun and has a history of B&E's. But fuck it... Its his GOD given right after!
Now whats funny is per capita Canadians own more gun's then Americans. But its not a right Red..Its just like driving isnt a right. Do you want a complete fuck around dumb shit having his licence? Yea why not. And when that fucker plows into your family car whats going to happen then? Its a fucking privlage to get these things! NOT a right.
#16
Guest_Red Sonic_*
Guest_Red Sonic_*
-
- GUESTS
Posted 01 August 2008 - 06:39 PM
Privledge or not, dumb f**ks get their license anyway. Sometimes, people with four or five DUIs will end up still having their license. People who have theirs taken AWAY still end up driving. Just like people who want guns will end up getting them--Law or not. And, frankly, if the day comes when a psycho with a gun comes into my house, I'd like to be able to OWN a gun of my own in order to defend my family.
We do have qualifications to owning handguns. Some places will require certian amounts of hours at a gun range before letting you buy one. Most states have a three day waiting period while they do a background check for prior offenses and psychological issues. Shotguns and rifles aren't held to that standard because most people use them for hunting. That's why you always hear of psychos going off with handguns, because carting around a rifle is a wee bit suspicious.
I feel that guns or not, people inclined to kill will do just that. Take your own Canada for instance: a man recently, for no apparent reason, started stabbing a guy sitting next to him on the bus. He stabbed him dozens of times, the DECAPITATED HIM, showed the head to the horrified onlookers, and proceeded to gut his body and mutilate the corpse. You Canadians are f**king hardcore, man. And not a gun in sight.
http://news.yahoo.co...8ZRKkAcbLOs0NUE
We do have qualifications to owning handguns. Some places will require certian amounts of hours at a gun range before letting you buy one. Most states have a three day waiting period while they do a background check for prior offenses and psychological issues. Shotguns and rifles aren't held to that standard because most people use them for hunting. That's why you always hear of psychos going off with handguns, because carting around a rifle is a wee bit suspicious.
I feel that guns or not, people inclined to kill will do just that. Take your own Canada for instance: a man recently, for no apparent reason, started stabbing a guy sitting next to him on the bus. He stabbed him dozens of times, the DECAPITATED HIM, showed the head to the horrified onlookers, and proceeded to gut his body and mutilate the corpse. You Canadians are f**king hardcore, man. And not a gun in sight.
http://news.yahoo.co...8ZRKkAcbLOs0NUE
#17
chief
-
- Admins
-
- 6,487 posts
An7imatt3r was here =p
- Gender:Male
- Location:West Coast, BC, Canada
Posted 01 August 2008 - 08:07 PM
Oh Ive never said murders or shit dont happin here. I'm trying say say its not a right to own a gun but a privlage. By thinking its a right to own one you get all sorts of wacko's saying its their god given right to own that gun. Not many people in Canada own hand guns. Hand guns are a restricted weapon as they done serve much of a purpose. Well besides target practice or shooting people. You can still own them but you need more permits.
And hey you go right ahead and keep a gun under your pillow to protect yourself from that phyco. Live in fear of that man about to kill your family. But hey just make sure its not little Johny running into your house for help cause his grandma is having a heart attack. Oops sorry Little Johny, I thought your running quickly into my house was a phyco.. You dont need that head eh?
Constant fear, lets load everyone up with more guns. The more guns the better eh! Lets see those fucktards come and mess with me and my revolver! Come and get me boy! YEE HAW! I'll be a waiti'n.
And hey you go right ahead and keep a gun under your pillow to protect yourself from that phyco. Live in fear of that man about to kill your family. But hey just make sure its not little Johny running into your house for help cause his grandma is having a heart attack. Oops sorry Little Johny, I thought your running quickly into my house was a phyco.. You dont need that head eh?
Constant fear, lets load everyone up with more guns. The more guns the better eh! Lets see those fucktards come and mess with me and my revolver! Come and get me boy! YEE HAW! I'll be a waiti'n.
#18
Guest_Red Sonic_*
Guest_Red Sonic_*
-
- GUESTS
Posted 02 August 2008 - 02:32 AM
Jesus Christ, man! Your imagination is so overblown, it borders on psychotic. Never mind that scenario is so far out there it's more like you to be struck by lightning. It CAN happen, but given that most kids would be running and yelling 'daddy, daddy' when trying to get our attention...
Plus, you need to think of this: a lot of us know that a mere step in the direction of infringing on what are our constitutional right will set a precedent that lets even further legislation and further restrictions get their foot in the door. It may start out as higher restrictions on handguns, but once the precedent is set, there's no reversing it and it allows those who think we shouldn't have guns at all begin to set their foot in. What can start as an absolute sincere humanitarian ideal could end up having one of our constitutional rights taken away. It can happen and all it takes is a step in that direction to keep the ball rolling. That's why so many oppose it, because there shouldn't be a fear that our rights will be taken away.
Plus, you need to think of this: a lot of us know that a mere step in the direction of infringing on what are our constitutional right will set a precedent that lets even further legislation and further restrictions get their foot in the door. It may start out as higher restrictions on handguns, but once the precedent is set, there's no reversing it and it allows those who think we shouldn't have guns at all begin to set their foot in. What can start as an absolute sincere humanitarian ideal could end up having one of our constitutional rights taken away. It can happen and all it takes is a step in that direction to keep the ball rolling. That's why so many oppose it, because there shouldn't be a fear that our rights will be taken away.
#19
chief
-
- Admins
-
- 6,487 posts
An7imatt3r was here =p
- Gender:Male
- Location:West Coast, BC, Canada
Posted 02 August 2008 - 12:17 PM
Is it a right to drive or a privlage? And nothing against you but hey.. We aren't against those blasterdly red skins any more. constitutions should change sometimes when something as dumb as the RIGHT to own a gun. All I'm saying is it should be a fucking privlage. I have nothing against guns Red. I'm a fucking hunter and I own some rifles myself. So I hope no one is here going off "OMG Chief is anti gun!" Cause if anyone is thinking that... Go fuck yourself. All I'm trying to say is it shouldnt be a right but a privlage to own one.
#20
Guest_Red Sonic_*
Guest_Red Sonic_*
-
- GUESTS
Posted 02 August 2008 - 02:32 PM
Well, I can kind of agree to that point. Frankly, I think an intelligence test should be given for anyone to either drive, own a gun...and maybe even have sex, cause I know some people who shouldn't be allowed to reproduce.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
