125
Why Liberals Should Thank Justice Scalia for Gun Control : Swingers Discussion 215559101
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 DiscussionsPoliticsWhy Liberals Should Thank Justice Scalia for Gun Control
TOPIC: Why Liberals Should Thank Justice Scalia for Gun Control
Created by: Nkenswing
Original Starting post for this thread:
One of the ironies of the gun-control debate is that Justice Antonin Scalia’s ruling in an important Supreme Court case left the door open to gun control. The conservative jurist and star of the ideological Right didn’t get soft and squishy in his 2008 ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court’s biggest ruling on guns in modern times.

Scalia will never be a hero to liberals, of course. But his emphasis on originalism and textualism seems to coincide with liberal interests on guns precisely because there were restrictions on guns during the colonial era; his reading of the original intent of the law was that it allowed an average person to have a typical firearm. Indeed, back in July, when he was promoting a new book, Scalia told Fox News that the Second Amendment “undoubtedly” permits some restrictions on firearms.

Look at the syllabus of the Court’s brief that he wrote:

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. [United States v.] 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.

So, what do you guys day now?

GoTo Page: 1 2 3
 1 to 10 of 29   End
User Details are only visible to members.
outdorrs Parents well yes it is a fact, or more so when there are no fathers in the home. Numbers demonstrate this is a huge fact in kids that kill. Because of where that leads us I'm not going. Both of us would end up being labeled as racists. Parenting, good and bad, existing and non existing, has a huge impact on a child's future actions.

Red Bluff CA
Username hidden
(438 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
ZZ now you are on the never ending slippery slope. you just want to remove the tools..... If you took away all firearms except single shots you would then have a problem with archers. As many deer, hogs, and a few elk could attest, I can hit most things I shoot at with my bow out to about 50 yards. All of the mass shooters victims in the last ten years in this country have been much closer than that. I can shoot my bow Accurately much faster than you can a single shot rifle or pistol with just as much of a deadly result. Actually it is worse. My broadheads will slice right through most of the soft body armor that LEO's currently wear. Yes that is a true fact. I've watched the demonstrations. So just where are you going to stop the taking away the tools that can kill people? From this we aren't far from rocks and sticks that actually do kill more people each year than those hated assault rifles do.

Red Bluff CA
Username hidden
(438 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"did the Gun pull the trigger? or was it the Guy behind it? "

It was a finger. Fingers are dangerous. No, it was the nerve that sent the impulse to the finger. Nerves are dangerous. No, it was the thought that started the impulse. Thoughts are dangerous. No, it was the upbringing that created the environment for the thought. Parents are dangerous.

Flat Rock NC
Username hidden
(2984 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Frank

What kind of screwed up brain do you have?? You're OK that the shooter MIGHT have been stopped after firing 7 rounds by an unarmed person, but you won't accept that the shooter MIGHT have been stopped before firing less rounds by an armed person????

That's seriously fucked up.

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(17353 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Just don't alter them like your prone to do.

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(2789 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"NK would you like me to pull up some of your lies and assertions? to prove once again you spew lies and or misinformation?"

What's stopping you? Go ahead ...

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(2789 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Take away the tools and accessories that limit the possibility for using a weapon of mass destruction, and you solve much of the problem of the crazy guy killing innocent civilians. His trigger finger shouldn't have more rights than those innocent, unarmed Americans pursuing life, liberty, and happiness in public places.

Treasure Is FL
Username hidden
(7064 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Frank

These are YOUR words: "Look another would of, should of, could of boast "

Pittsburgh PA
Username hidden
(17353 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Welllll M, if RDY was there maybe Adam would have slipped and broke his neck on twinkie crumbs left behind RDY.

Sanford NC
Username hidden
(19526 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
RDY- did the Gun pull the trigger? or was it the Guy behind it?

Let's get that straight, People like you seem to forget there was a person who did this not the object alone.

Burlingham NY
Username hidden
(9711 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3
 1 to 10 of 29   End
TOPIC: Why Liberals Should Thank Justice Scalia for Gun Control