Gun Control & RKBA

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)

40. What SCOTUS decision did

Reply to COLGATE4 (Reply #28)

Mon Mar 19, 2012, 11:10 AM

Mar 2012

Citizens United overturn?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

102 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Looking for a well-regulated militia [View all] DetlefK Mar 2012 OP

..... daleanime Mar 2012 #1

Oh jeez.. shadowrider Mar 2012 #2

I don't get your point. DetlefK Mar 2012 #7

Well if this is a true post Drale Mar 2012 #3

the National Guard is not really a militia gejohnston Mar 2012 #6

Well, since you're foreign, let me help.. X_Digger Mar 2012 #4

Thanks. DetlefK Mar 2012 #9

It was never 'widened'- it was always there. X_Digger Mar 2012 #11

militias still exist gejohnston Mar 2012 #18

Yes, it's funny how the only Amendment that has COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #20

Except it isn't new, nor is that construction strange in writings of the time.. X_Digger Mar 2012 #22

It just strikes me as a little odd COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #27

That is the purpose, not the scope. X_Digger Mar 2012 #30

Semantic gibberish COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #31

aka, you got nothing. X_Digger Mar 2012 #32

Not at all COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #35

Again, purpose, not scope. X_Digger Mar 2012 #37

Again, I fail to see the logic of your premise. COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #43

'Why' does not equal 'how much'. X_Digger Mar 2012 #50

With all due respect COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #51

No, you missed the point.. you're reading it as a restriction on people, not the government. X_Digger Mar 2012 #56

No, I'm reading it for the purpose COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #57

'permits the bearing of arms' -- fundamentally wrong X_Digger Mar 2012 #61

I don't know where you get this COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #65

Err, I think you need a class on the enlightenment and our system of government... X_Digger Mar 2012 #66

A militia can be one person too. era veteran Mar 2012 #21

In 1992, a 'militia' saved entire blocks of businesses and residences in koreatown in LA AtheistCrusader Mar 2012 #96

Okay... TheWraith Mar 2012 #5

Start your own Ezlivin Mar 2012 #8

Top Shot is a joke. Throwing hatchets? Grenade Launchers? And the drama and fighting. It is a.... Logical Mar 2012 #16

I just think it would be great fun to have access Ezlivin Mar 2012 #17

I 100% agree. I would love to shoot there. But I wish they could have not dropped to... Logical Mar 2012 #19

They're usually done by state chrisa Mar 2012 #10

No, that is not the SOLE purpose of the right to keep and bear arms slackmaster Mar 2012 #12

which would in turn be regulated by some authority. ?? Tuesday Afternoon Mar 2012 #13

"The text is very clear" PavePusher Mar 2012 #14

I refuse to argue with foreigners shadowrider Mar 2012 #15

Justice Stevens' dissent in Heller explains it adequately -- to gun-carrying culture's chagrin. Hoyt Mar 2012 #23

To who's chagrin? PavePusher Mar 2012 #24

If you know anything about Constitutional Law COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #28

What SCOTUS decision did gejohnston Mar 2012 #40

I was (inartfully) trying to COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #54

I see, I tend to think Citizens United will be gejohnston Mar 2012 #55

Let's hope so. COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #58

Does the fact that you're praising a Scalia decision and criticizing _ed_ Mar 2012 #36

Stevens is a Republican gejohnston Mar 2012 #39

Are you seriously suggesting that Stevens' _ed_ Mar 2012 #41

Do you support the Brady Campaign? shadowrider Mar 2012 #42

He was a Republican in 1975 gejohnston Mar 2012 #44

Since you're determined to use the genetic fallacy, what about United States v. Jones? friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #45

I give you Kelo v. City of New London . PavePusher Mar 2012 #48

Our interlocutor seems to have left the building... friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #70

Not really, as I don't simply accept party-line doctrine as gospel. PavePusher Mar 2012 #47

Stevens does backflips to deny what's clear as the nose on his face. X_Digger Mar 2012 #25

You're absolutely right. COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #29

As usual you come up with the "gun-carrying culture" insult rl6214 Mar 2012 #33

There are three entities in the 2nd Amendment krispos42 Mar 2012 #26

In short term, I'll accept those 45 and older leaving guns at home. Hoyt Mar 2012 #67

Why not women? krispos42 Mar 2012 #72

Women carriers are usually OK. They aren't trying to prove something to themselves or others. Hoyt Mar 2012 #73

That's a rather sexist statement... friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #74

Yes it is. It does demean men who carry and use guns for things far removed from self-defense. Hoyt Mar 2012 #75

Fine. As long as you don't pretend that your personal experiences represent society at large. friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #76

As are the aged. krispos42 Mar 2012 #83

Don't think I'm discriminating - women don't have the same issues as men in this context. Hoyt Mar 2012 #84

But a far greater percentage of non-white teens are violent criminals. krispos42 Mar 2012 #86

No, if Martin had been white, he'd still be alive. Try not to "play odds" with your gun. Hoyt Mar 2012 #87

good lord Tuesday Afternoon Mar 2012 #91

But that's ok shadowrider Mar 2012 #92

Four random Jurors will allow it. I bet my bottom dollar on it plus, the jurors will add insult to Tuesday Afternoon Mar 2012 #93

You are quite right. The text is clear. DanTex Mar 2012 #34

"...the intent or proper interpretation of the Second Amendment". Let's ask a Constitutional scholar friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #49

Nothing more than political pap COLGATE4 Mar 2012 #52

He's speaking as a politician there, not as a constitutional scholar. DanTex Mar 2012 #53

The 3rd Amendment has been adjucated in my lifetime krispos42 Mar 2012 #62

No, from disarming PEOPLE. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #63

It might be right of people who are in a well regulated militia, but that is it. Hoyt Mar 2012 #69

Those militias no longer exist. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #81

Finally, you got it. We don't need a bunch of armed, but unregulated toters nowadays. Hoyt Mar 2012 #85

So how do you reconcile the rest of the amendment? Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #88

Read Stevens' dissent in Heller. It's clear. Hoyt Mar 2012 #90

we have gejohnston Mar 2012 #94

Perhaps you could tell me what part of it specifically you are referring to? Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #97

Outstanding post. Hoyt Mar 2012 #68

Why was it important to prevent the federal government from disarming militias? Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #98

Your position is at odds with EVERYTHING! Surf Fishing Guru Mar 2012 #101

If you're foreign _ed_ Mar 2012 #38

Not so much gejohnston Mar 2012 #46

Please list your "sensible gun control" proposals. PavePusher Mar 2012 #59

You don't really expect an answer do you? oneshooter Mar 2012 #78

Hey, they should be offered the chance to prove their bonafides, and engage in honest debate. PavePusher Mar 2012 #79

Still... Waiting... n/t PavePusher Mar 2012 #99

The RKBA is an individual right, and need not be connected to any militia. montanto Mar 2012 #60

Understanding the second amendment. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #64

You guys sure have to spin in all directions to get that interpretation of 2nd. Hoyt Mar 2012 #71

Quite humorous... Clames Mar 2012 #77

Yeah, opinion of 5 right wing judges. Hoyt Mar 2012 #80

All 9 judges agreed the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #102

Can you muster any specific refutation of what I wrote? Atypical Liberal Mar 2012 #82

Bu-bu-but.... "Militia, militia, militia....!" PavePusher Mar 2012 #89

If you don't understand, why do you make a positive claim about how the text is clear? AtheistCrusader Mar 2012 #95

Your focus is perfectly backwards Surf Fishing Guru Mar 2012 #100