 91 replies |
Author | Time | Post |
 Scalia Suggests ‘Hand-Held Rocket Launchers’ Are Protected Under Second Amendment (Original post) |
kpete | Jul 2012 | OP |
| xtraxritical | Jul 2012 | #1 | |
| PavePusher | Jul 2012 | #8 | |
| Occulus | Jul 2012 | #17 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #26 | |
| nanabugg | Jul 2012 | #44 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #51 | |
| baldguy | Jul 2012 | #2 | |
| dipsydoodle | Jul 2012 | #3 | |
| madrchsod | Jul 2012 | #16 | |
| shcrane71 | Jul 2012 | #4 | |
| iamthebandfanman | Jul 2012 | #6 | |
| PavePusher | Jul 2012 | #11 | |
| kestrel91316 | Jul 2012 | #19 | |
| happyslug | Jul 2012 | #29 | |
| PavePusher | Jul 2012 | #60 | |
| baldguy | Jul 2012 | #57 | |
| PavePusher | Jul 2012 | #61 | |
| baldguy | Jul 2012 | #64 | |
| bahrbearian | Jul 2012 | #14 | |
| sofa king | Jul 2012 | #47 | |
| nykym | Jul 2012 | #78 | |
| BlueinOhio | Jul 2012 | #5 | |
| SoapBox | Jul 2012 | #7 | |
| NV Whino | Jul 2012 | #9 | |
| BlueinOhio | Jul 2012 | #10 | |
| Zorro | Jul 2012 | #12 | |
| McCamy Taylor | Jul 2012 | #13 | |
| -..__... | Jul 2012 | #22 | |
| Gman | Jul 2012 | #15 | |
| AlbertCat | Jul 2012 | #18 | |
| 99th_Monkey | Jul 2012 | #43 | |
| Thor_MN | Jul 2012 | #67 | |
| AlbertCat | Jul 2012 | #70 | |
| Iliyah | Jul 2012 | #20 | |
| bucolic_frolic | Jul 2012 | #21 | |
| Speaker | Jul 2012 | #65 | |
| indypaul | Jul 2012 | #23 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #28 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #48 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #50 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #56 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #58 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #68 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #71 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #73 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #86 | |
| boppers | Jul 2012 | #30 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #49 | |
| X_Digger | Jul 2012 | #59 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #69 | |
| X_Digger | Jul 2012 | #72 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #74 | |
| X_Digger | Jul 2012 | #76 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #81 | |
| X_Digger | Jul 2012 | #82 | |
| bongbong | Jul 2012 | #84 | |
| X_Digger | Jul 2012 | #85 | |
| boppers | Jul 2012 | #88 | |
| petronius | Jul 2012 | #32 | |
| Speaker | Jul 2012 | #66 | |
| Ter | Jul 2012 | #90 | |
| elbloggoZY27 | Jul 2012 | #24 | |
| AlinPA | Jul 2012 | #25 | |
| sarisataka | Jul 2012 | #27 | |
| slackmaster | Jul 2012 | #31 | |
| unblock | Jul 2012 | #33 | |
| former9thward | Jul 2012 | #34 | |
| Warren Stupidity | Jul 2012 | #36 | |
| former9thward | Jul 2012 | #37 | |
| Warren Stupidity | Jul 2012 | #35 | |
| Chef Eric | Jul 2012 | #38 | |
| SnakeEyes | Jul 2012 | #55 | |
| Chef Eric | Jul 2012 | #63 | |
| onehandle | Jul 2012 | #39 | |
| Red Mountain | Jul 2012 | #40 | |
| Red Mountain | Jul 2012 | #41 | |
| RedStateLiberal | Jul 2012 | #42 | |
| Third Doctor | Jul 2012 | #45 | |
| Turbineguy | Jul 2012 | #46 | |
| hack89 | Jul 2012 | #52 | |
| sakabatou | Jul 2012 | #53 | |
| muntrv | Jul 2012 | #54 | |
| Kablooie | Jul 2012 | #62 | |
| bobthedrummer | Jul 2012 | #75 | |
| get the red out | Jul 2012 | #77 | |
| yurbud | Jul 2012 | #79 | |
| yurbud | Jul 2012 | #80 | |
| may3rd | Jul 2012 | #83 | |
| Auntie Bush | Jul 2012 | #87 | |
| Bolo Boffin | Jul 2012 | #89 | |
| NuttyFluffers | Jul 2012 | #91 |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:09 PM
xtraxritical (2,978 posts)
1. This douche will protect a "right" to kill but not a six year old girls right to live.
Response to PavePusher (Reply #8)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:15 PM
Occulus (20,331 posts)
17. It's inherent to the Second Amendment
Response to Occulus (Reply #17)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:20 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
26. Only self defense
Response to nanabugg (Reply #44)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 08:51 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
51. I do believe in well regulated
Response to baldguy (Reply #2)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:20 PM
dipsydoodle (32,648 posts)
3. At this rate you shouldn 't have to wait too long.
Response to dipsydoodle (Reply #3)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:59 PM
madrchsod (55,729 posts)
16. no it was`t
Response to baldguy (Reply #2)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:28 PM
4. As long as it fits into a suitcase, Scalia would probably be OK with that. nt
Response to PavePusher (Reply #11)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:19 PM
kestrel91316 (45,405 posts)
19. I assume, then, that you fully support the right of Americans to
Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #19)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:25 PM
happyslug (10,761 posts)
29. Even n 1792 you had restrictions as where you could do with weapons
Response to PavePusher (Reply #11)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 10:13 PM
57. And there's no fear & hyseria sown by people who say 30,000 gun deaths each year is "a good start".
Response to PavePusher (Reply #61)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 06:12 AM
64. Grow up & stop whining.
|
Last edited Mon Jul 30, 2012, 06:19 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to baldguy (Reply #2)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:49 PM
bahrbearian (11,108 posts)
14. Yes, It falls under the" Mutual Destruction Amendment, of the Constitution.
Response to baldguy (Reply #2)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 07:37 PM
47. Ha! That's just what I was going to say!
|
I believe a mushroom cloud of this size is easily covered under the Second Amendment:
How else am I to control the ground-hogs on mah prop ah tay? |
Response to baldguy (Reply #2)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 03:43 PM
78. Or you can carry it around with your luggage
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:29 PM
BlueinOhio (200 posts)
5. Oh yeah
|
My crazy neighbors and the couple idoits I worked with can now have their nukes.
 |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:37 PM
9. Does this mean I can stand my ground in front of the Supreme Court building?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:38 PM
BlueinOhio (200 posts)
10. You have got to be kidding
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:48 PM
Zorro (3,998 posts)
12. I caught a bit of the show this AM
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:48 PM
13. So a hand held tactical nuke is ok? Where can I get one?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 12:50 PM
Gman (21,168 posts)
15. No wonder we're in trouble
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:19 PM
AlbertCat (10,450 posts)
18. Stuff and nonsense!
Response to AlbertCat (Reply #18)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 05:23 PM
99th_Monkey (7,205 posts)
43. That's what keeps blowing my mind ....
Response to AlbertCat (Reply #18)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 08:41 AM
67. If it suited his purposes, he would cite that a modern semi automatic rifle has the equivalent
Response to Thor_MN (Reply #67)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 01:29 PM
AlbertCat (10,450 posts)
70. Scalia's a strict Constitutionalist...
|
.... who apparently knows nothing about life in the 18th century!
 |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:30 PM
21. Founding Father Originalists
|
Last edited Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:39 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 01:34 PM
indypaul (942 posts)
23. The second amendment also refers to
Response to indypaul (Reply #23)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:25 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
28. The first clause
Response to bongbong (Reply #48)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 08:47 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
50. Still waiting your cite
Response to sarisataka (Reply #50)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 09:47 PM
56. I explained it already
|
Miller.
You think Heller is the first ruling on the 2nd Amendment? LOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLO Here is a key phrase from Miller. "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to any preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense." Now substitute "handgun" for "shotgun" (only gun-relgionists make such fine distinctions between death-machines that are more-or-less the same as shotguns & handguns), and you'll learn the truth. I'm amazed at how little gun-relgionists know about gun laws. Well, maybe not so amazed.  |
Response to bongbong (Reply #56)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 10:22 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
58. Does not answer the question
|
Of any other SCOTUS ruling that says 2A is not an individual right....
It ruled a short barrel shotgun is suitable for military use. Now substitute "handgun" for "shotgun" (only gun-relgionists make such fine distinctions between death-machines that are more-or-less the same as shotguns & handguns), and you'll learn the truth.
Does the military use handguns?- in the last 100 years a non-comprehensive list- M1911 .45 semi auto pistol M1917 .45 revolver .38 revolvers by various manufacturers M9 9mm semi auto pistol M11 9mm semi auto pistol P226 9mm semi auto pistol H&K USP .45 semi auto pistol I congratulate you on regaining the crown of most uninformed statement substitute "handgun" for "shotgun" (only gun-relgionists make such fine distinctions between death-machines that are more-or-less the same as shotguns & handguns)
much like saying only a car-religionist would make such a fine distinction between a Ferrari and a minivan I award you your crown 
|
Response to sarisataka (Reply #58)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:06 AM
68. I knew it!
|
Yes, the EXACT differences between guns make A WHOLE LOT OF DIFFERENCE....
But only to gun-relgionists. Not so much to SCOTUS justices or any other sane person. |
Response to bongbong (Reply #68)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 01:31 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
71. Well we are finally getting some where
Response to bongbong (Reply #73)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 09:55 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
86. Some interesting things about Miller
Response to indypaul (Reply #23)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:26 PM
30. Militia meant "old enough, and willing to, fight".
Response to bongbong (Reply #49)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 10:52 PM
X_Digger (13,125 posts)
59. Please refer to previous conversations..
Response to X_Digger (Reply #59)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:11 AM
69. He's back!
|
Last edited Mon Jul 30, 2012, 11:34 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) I already refuted all your objections about Federalist Paper #29. The strategy of the gun-religonists is to try to overwhelm the sane Liberals on DU into accepting their Precious (guns) as a Harmless Wonderful Thing. Among other things, they do this by repeating their "arguments" even when refuted. Kind of like putting fingers in one's ears and saying "LA LA LA I can't hear you".
> Lest anyone actually think you know what you're saying... The trademark of the digger. Declarations of victory. So predictable. Lest anyone actually think you know what you're saying... http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/07/1052523/-The-Second-Amendment-Myth
You gun-relgionists are unhinged, I think. Your attempts to make the DU community look at guns as warm, fuzzy, & harmless is insane. |
Response to bongbong (Reply #69)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 02:28 PM
X_Digger (13,125 posts)
72. Feel free to quote a post of yours, then.
Response to X_Digger (Reply #72)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 02:38 PM
74. Victory is MINE, saith Digger
|
> *crickets*
I think THIS particular Victory Declaration must've taken you less than 10 seconds to type. A NEW RECORD! |
Response to bongbong (Reply #74)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 02:43 PM
X_Digger (13,125 posts)
76. Lol, I'm waiting for you to post your *cough* cogent reply
Response to X_Digger (Reply #76)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 06:11 PM
81. Why
|
I know the drill. You poo-poo anything a sane Liberal posts about gun control, then declare "VICTORY!"
You've only followed that pattern about 5000 times, so I don't expect it to change any time soon. |
Response to bongbong (Reply #81)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 06:25 PM
X_Digger (13,125 posts)
82. If you can't even make your case, why should anyone believe what you assert? n/t
Response to bongbong (Reply #84)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 06:58 PM
X_Digger (13,125 posts)
85. Yet you haven't addressed the substantive replies.
Response to indypaul (Reply #23)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:34 PM
petronius (19,652 posts)
32. Funnily enough, the militia aspect is probably the strongest bit of 2A in favor
Response to indypaul (Reply #23)
Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:04 AM
90. It means you can form para-military militias
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:15 PM
AlinPA (13,708 posts)
25. Stinger missiles are now protected under the 2nd amendment?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:23 PM
sarisataka (2,161 posts)
27. Being overlooked is what he said in another interview...
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 02:41 PM
33. once again, nothing he says makes any real sense.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 03:07 PM
former9thward (6,401 posts)
34. Plenty of stuff to attack Scalia but not this.
Response to former9thward (Reply #34)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 03:17 PM
Warren Stupidity (31,932 posts)
36. USSC justices are not governed by the judicial code of conduct,
Response to Warren Stupidity (Reply #36)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 03:23 PM
former9thward (6,401 posts)
37. Nice but not the subject matter of this thread or my post.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 03:09 PM
Warren Stupidity (31,932 posts)
35. 2nd absolutist, 1st, 4th, 5th: not so much.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 03:23 PM
38. How does one reconcile "originalism" with the 13th & 19th amendments?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 04:29 PM
onehandle (35,457 posts)
39. I agree. That's why their broken decision on the 2nd Amendment is fucking insane and wrong.
|
Last edited Sun Jul 29, 2012, 10:18 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 04:34 PM
Red Mountain (72 posts)
40. LOL.....in NC
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 04:40 PM
Red Mountain (72 posts)
41. In a textual sense.....
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 07:27 PM
Turbineguy (16,546 posts)
46. He's right of course.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 08:57 PM
52. You would think that gun control advocates would be happy.
|
Last edited Sun Jul 29, 2012, 08:57 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 08:57 PM
53. Scalia: Rocket launchers are ok. Birth control? ABSOLUTELY NOT! (see link)
Response to kpete (Original post)
Sun Jul 29, 2012, 08:58 PM
muntrv (8,345 posts)
54. Fine, Antonin! Does the First Amendment cover my right to
|
name my rocket launcher Scalia Killer?
 |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 01:31 AM
Kablooie (8,856 posts)
62. What about a remote control that triggers a cannon? That's hand held too.
|
Last edited Mon Jul 30, 2012, 01:32 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to kpete (Original post)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 02:40 PM
75. So are my chemical and biological devices, get some! n/t
Response to kpete (Original post)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 02:54 PM
get the red out (7,309 posts)
77. Maybe he thinks that's him after a little blue pill
|
Could be confused
|
Response to kpete (Original post)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 04:08 PM
yurbud (31,406 posts)
79. What do you do when a Supreme Court justice starts make televangelists look like
Response to kpete (Original post)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 04:09 PM
yurbud (31,406 posts)
80. the difference between Scalia and the average red neck conservative:
Response to kpete (Original post)
Mon Jul 30, 2012, 10:41 PM
Auntie Bush (15,255 posts)
87. Is this man crazy?...or what?
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 31, 2012, 12:00 AM
89. I'm getting my suitcase nuke in Louis Vuitton.
Response to kpete (Original post)
Tue Jul 31, 2012, 04:05 AM
91. does this apply to (holy or not) grenades? is this a backdoor loophole to fireworks bans?
