If you need the government's permission to exercise a right... it is not a right after all

[scruffy]

Supreme Court ruled years ago, regulations applied to weapons do not interfere with the 2nd Amendment. Pay the radical right (all the guns, for all the people, all the time crowd) no mind or just come out and state you no longer support the Supreme Court as created in the constitution and are ready to join the little anarchy crowd. Institutions of government are not bad or outdate, just because the stand in the way of the nut ball (like Trump and trumper et al, getting their way. They just know you have to discredit the institutions if you have a chance in hell of getting away with it.

The Supreme Morons have been wrong more than they've been right.

 

[pknopp]

Supreme Court ruled years ago, regulations applied to weapons do not interfere with the 2nd Amendment. Pay the radical right (all the guns, for all the people, all the time crowd) no mind or just come out and state you no longer support the Supreme Court as created in the constitution and are ready to join the little anarchy crowd. Institutions of government are not bad or outdate, just because the stand in the way of the nut ball (like Trump and trumper et al, getting their way. They just know you have to discredit the institutions if you have a chance in hell of getting away with it.

They never ruled that. When they ruled on Heller they noted that their ruling couldn't be taken as there would never be any regulations that would stand BUT they never argued they would either.

 

[there4eyeM]

What is a "right" if one cannot exercise it? If a criminal holds a gun on you, where is your "right" to freely circulate? When society provides security protection so that rights can be exercised, those rights are thus permitted.
People need to expand their understanding of things.

 

[maybelooking]

Then jump in your 'Wayback Machine" Mr. Peabody and go back and deal with all the supreme courts for the last hundred years, including the present one. They ruled, interpreting the constitution, weapons can be regulated without interfering with rights guaranteed under the constitution.

And anything they ruled that infringes on the Bill Of Rights is HORSE SHIT.

 

[Kondor3]

If you need the government's permission to exercise a right... it is not a right after all

For some reason, this stuck in my head after a poster (name? can't recall) said this. I'm trying to figure out if background checks for gun-buyers is ... gummit permission? But it is looking like it to me.. convince me otherwise if you can

In any case, I totally agree that if the gummit puts restrictions on any right, meaning unreasonable ones that interfere with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment, then you do not have that right like you think. The thought occurs to me that X restriction today leads to Y restriction tomorrow until... voila'... you wake up one day and all the guns Americans used to own are now in the hands of

OMG

the commies who rule over us

OMG... drama-queen much?

 

[White 6]

How does that prove their pronunciations about the Constitution are correct?

The Supreme Court has the ability and responsibility to interpret, under our system.

 

[White 6]

And anything they ruled that infringes on the Bill Of Rights is HORSE SHIT.

That is your opinion, but their opinion actually affects the law.

 

[HandleTheTruth]

If you need the government's permission to exercise a right... it is not a right after all

For some reason, this stuck in my head after a poster (name? can't recall) said this. I'm trying to figure out if background checks for gun-buyers is ... gummit permission? But it is looking like it to me.. convince me otherwise if you can

In any case, I totally agree that if the gummit puts restrictions on any right, meaning unreasonable ones that interfere with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment, then you do not have that right like you think. The thought occurs to me that X restriction today leads to Y restriction tomorrow until... voila'... you wake up one day and all the guns Americans used to own are now in the hands of

OMG

the commies who rule over us

As rush Limbaugh said.

The constitution is not a death sentence.

 

[bripat9643]

And yet, you said nothing to counter what I said.

The document itself proves you wrong. Nowhere does it say what the court claims it says. Where does it say the government can regulate firearms?

 

[bripat9643]

The Supreme Court has the ability and responsibility to interpret, under our system.

What does that prove? Furthermore, that's the court's opinion. Nowhere does the Constitution say that.

 

[maybelooking]

That is your opinion, but their opinion actually affects the law.

They got one right today. Suck it.

 

[White 6]

The Supreme Morons have been wrong more than they've been right.

Tell it to the people of New York that would like to carry personal protection, as the Supreme Court just made New York and 7 other states into "shall issue" states, free from special need provisions, that were preventing those citizens from exercising their rights.

 

[maybelooking]

Tell it to the people of New York that would like to carry personal protection, as the Supreme Court just made New York and 7 other states into "shall issue" states, free from special need provisions, that were preventing those citizens from exercising their rights.

doesn't change the fact that they've been wrong more than they've been right.

glad they got this one right......they should fix all the other infringements they have made against us!!!

 

[White 6]

They got one right today. Suck it.

I'm happy for the people of New York and those 7 other states and already posted it to somebody that was complaining about the Supreme Court having the authority and responsibility to rule on such matters. No Matter though, it was just one of the right wing bomb throwers that seem to think all institutions of government along with the Constitution should be chucked out in favor of some other type of rule, probably one that has not lasted as long as ours. Think of them like the trump supporter supporting Trumps actions to illegally overthrow the election, mostly deciding more on partisanship than constitution, and always ready to discount the institutions of government if they do not decide in their favor.

 

[maybelooking]

I'm happy for the people of New York and those 7 other states and already posted it to somebody that was complaining about the Supreme Court having the authority and responsibility to rule on such matters. No Matter though, it was just one of the right wing bomb throwers that seem to think all institutions of government along with the Constitution should be chucked out in favor of some other type of rule, probably one that has not lasted as long as ours. Think of them like the trump supporter supporting Trumps actions to illegally overthrow the election, mostly deciding more on partisanship than constitution, and always ready to discount the institutions of government if they do not decide in their favor.

no, the people who AGREE with the Constitution are the ones you dont like.

The 2nd is CRYSTAL CLEAR and places no restraints on the people, ONLY the govt. Dont like it, AMEND IT. Thats the way its supposed to be.

The ones wanting to CHUCK the Constitution are the ones that agree with all the infringements that have taken place.

 

[White 6]

no, the people who AGREE with the Constitution are the ones you dont like.

The 2nd is CRYSTAL CLEAR and places no restraints on the people, ONLY the govt. Dont like it, AMEND IT. Thats the way its supposed to be.

The ones wanting to CHUCK the Constitution are the ones that agree with all the infringements that have taken place.

That is your interpretation. I guess the Supreme Courts disagrees and theirs is the opinion of record, rather than yours. I support the Supreme Court and validity their decision, even when I don't like one, as not liking one does not make me right and certainly not overriding authority.

 

[pknopp]

The document itself proves you wrong. Nowhere does it say what the court claims it says. Where does it say the government can regulate firearms?

Where did I say it did? Want to discuss when it's the right time to plant your pumpkins also?

 

[maybelooking]

That is your interpretation. I guess the Supreme Courts disagrees and theirs is the opinion of record, rather than yours. I support the Supreme Court and validity their decision, even when I don't like one, as not liking one does not make me right and certainly not overriding authority.

nope. its not an interpretation or an opinion. its a FACT.

read the 2nd and explain to me where it allows for infringement? explain to me where it places any restraints on the people?

ill wait.

 

[White 6]

nope. its not an interpretation or an opinion. its a FACT.

read the 2nd and explain to me where it allows for infringement? explain to me where it places any restraints on the people?

ill wait.

Have a nice wait. I'll stick with the Supreme Court.

 

[Flash]

If you need the government's permission to exercise a right... it is not a right after all

For some reason, this stuck in my head after a poster (name? can't recall) said this. I'm trying to figure out if background checks for gun-buyers is ... gummit permission? But it is looking like it to me.. convince me otherwise if you can

In any case, I totally agree that if the gummit puts restrictions on any right, meaning unreasonable ones that interfere with the spirit of the 2nd Amendment, then you do not have that right like you think. The thought occurs to me that X restriction today leads to Y restriction tomorrow until... voila'... you wake up one day and all the guns Americans used to own are now in the hands of

OMG

the commies who rule over us

I am probably the one that you heard it from because I have been saying it a lot lately.

If you have to get a background check before you can enjoy the right to keep and bear arms then that is having to get government permission and is not right.

The NY case today even affirmed that "shall issue" permits are OK and that is also government permission and that is also not right.