115
We have an AMERICAN CITIZEN ON AMERICAN SOIL accused of Terrorism : Swingers Discussion 2205811021
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsWe have an AMERICAN CITIZEN ON AMERICAN SOIL accused of Terrorism
TOPIC: We have an AMERICAN CITIZEN ON AMERICAN SOIL accused of Terrorism
GoTo Page: Less ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... More 
Start   21 to 30 of 366   End
User Details are only visible to members.
"2.While "reasonable" may be subjective in the non legal vernacular, it has very specific meaning in Legal terminology"

That's supposed to be for the sake of accuracy? "Reasonable" in the legal vocabulary is about as non-specific as it gets. There are many thousands of cases trying to define what a "reasonable" suspicion means just under the 4th Amendment for search and seizure purposes. Specific my ass.

Belle Chasse LA
Username hidden
(10776 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"1. The majority opinion in Heller intentionally left the door open for judicial review of future legislation, but did so with some very specific prequisits, the msot important being the term "COMMONLY USED" IN ADDITION TO COMMONLY OWNED. Something the NRA cult would like to mignore"

The most important door they left open was the standard of review they will use in the future. They explicitly rejected the "rational" or "reasonable" standard, but stopped short of confirming they would use the same strict scrutiny standard that usually applies in fundamental rights case. So, they might use a slightly less rigorous approach in the future, although the legal scholars I've read predict they will stick with strict scrutiny. But clearly, any gun restriction will have to be more than merely "reasonable" in order to hold up.

Belle Chasse LA
Username hidden
(10776 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
A few things for the sake of accuracy 1. The majority opinion in Heller intentionally left the door open for judicial review of future legislation, but did so with some very specific prequisits, the msot important being the term "COMMONLY USED" IN ADDITION TO COMMONLY OWNED. Something the NRA cult would like to mignore

2.While "reasonable" may be subjective in the non legal vernacular, it has very specific meaning in Legal terminology

3. While I completely support the uses of lethal force be it by drone, robot, or sniper in cases where there is "reasonable" cause to believe a person is a clear and present danger to American security, no matter if he is in Yemen, Boston or Idaho, I am in fact glad one of these brothers was taken alive. The motive DOES matter.

Rosemont IL
Username hidden
(3841 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
2try:

The Police are not western style bounty hunters, they are charged with upholding the law and the law states they must make every effort to take a suspect alive.

The suspect in this case may very well have done as accused (admitted to), however at the end of the day, he was unable to fight anymore. The police had no other option, they were honor, duty and legally bound to take the suspect alive.

Hazle Township PA
Username hidden
(7345 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
When they came for me I only had 7 bullets to fight them off.

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(16805 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Hoping to see Mrs. Sav back in the political fora soon.

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(16805 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
" Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not 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 and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56. "

Our rights are limited based on circumstance, and 'reasonableness' according to the cite from Miller.

I can't see much difference limiting the rights of naturalized citizens under circumstance of serious crime or mayhem.

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(16805 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"Seems to me that Fun was not arguing what the standard of judicial review should be, rather he was simply explaining what it is. I wonder if Perf recognizes the difference. "

Feel free to offer up an explanation. I don't want to jump to conclusions. :-)

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(16805 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Fun: "Passing a gun law that is subject to judicial review is very different than advocating that this kid be shipped off somewhere as an enemy combatant, specifically in an attempt to avoid judicial involvement. "

Perf: "Sure, One right is more important than another...even though it's the 2nd right specifically mentioned."

Seems to me that Fun was not arguing what the standard of judicial review should be, rather he was simply explaining what it is. I wonder if Perf recognizes the difference.

Amherst Canada
Username hidden
(2368 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Excuse the grammaticals, the brain moves faster or slower than the typing hand, can't figure out which.

Blythe GA
Username hidden
(250 posts)
GoTo Page: Less ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ... More 
Start   21 to 30 of 366   End
TOPIC: We have an AMERICAN CITIZEN ON AMERICAN SOIL accused of Terrorism