Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 77

Thread: Appeals Court Overturns D.C. Gun Ban

  1. #46
    Like other laws " to protect us from ourselves " , the only ones affected are those who are law abiding citizens ..

    We dont need more restrictive gun laws , we need to enforce ALL the laws that we have .. What good is a law if someone gets a plea bargain , and does little or no time , and is back out on the street ..

    If all these gun laws reduce crime , why is it that DC and all the other big cities with restrictive gun laws have the highest rates of gun crime ??

    More people are killed in automobiles than by firearms , but I dont see anybody trying to ban automobiles .. Acceptable risk I suppose ...

    Wrong topic to get me started on ..

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Mt. Pleasant, MI
    Posts
    2,924
    For Jason.. I grew up in Midland, three miles north of the mall off Blackhurst road. Graduated Dow High in 89.

    Ken... The bar's name is "The Hound's Den" It is about half of my basement.

    Poker, pool and all the trimmings.

    Everyone is welcome.

    As a side note it is a pleasure to follow a thread as such that actually remains civil. Everyone should be commended.

    Just because I don't agree with someone's opinion doesn't mean I don't half to like them. Agree to disagree and all that. In fact I have had this exact discussion with one of our detectives when they CCW law was in the works. He was dead set against it and was sure it would lead to all kinds of crime. He still is even though, years later there is no statistics to back it up.

    Joe
    JC Custom WoodWorks

    For best results, try not to do anything stupid.

    "So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause." - Padmé Amidala "Star Wars III: The Revenge of the Sith"

  3. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack Dickey
    Constitutional lawyers have said for many years that when you look at the wording of the second amendment and compare it to the wording in other areas of the Constitution , that it is obvious that the second amendment refers to an individual right ..
    Some of us have. The Constitutional scholar Larry Tribe says it's individual and not some mushy un-focused collective right.



    And oh by the way very early in the constitution it does say that the citizens have the constitutional authority to overthrow a tyrannical government .. They dont want you to know that either ..
    I don't think I know what you mean by "very early in the constitution" There is only one Constitution and no where is that codified into law. However the early Federealist founders clearly understood that an armed civilian militia would serve not merely to be able to turn out to repel invaders but to also serve as yet another check against tyrrany at home. In fact the preamble before the comma in the amemdment was added dutring the Second Congress to satisify the Antifereralists. It does not serve to limit the second half of the 2nd Amendment.

    Go to the PDF of the opinion in this case and take a gander at page 37.
    The opinion can be found here:
    http://www.saf.org/dc.lawsuit/parker.decision.pdf

    You can find the following words on page 37
    "(Alexander Hamilton), No. 46
    (James Madison) (arguing that an armed populace constitutes a check on the potential abuses of the federal government) "
    Last edited by Cliff Rohrabacher; 03-12-2007 at 12:44 PM.

  4. #49
    I agree with you. Born here(western Kentucky) and I've been here my whole life. From a very young age I knew where the guns were, they weren't hidden, and I knew that they weren't toys and that I shouldn't play with them. I still know where they are(heck if I look to my left right now the gun cabinet is staring back at me) and my brother and I are trusted enough and know how to properly use them to the point where we are trusted with them if we want to go target shoot at my uncles' house even if no one is there. Guns don't kill people and people don't kill people...stupid people kill people.

    -Ryan C.
    -Ryan C.

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Mt. Pleasant, MI
    Posts
    2,924
    Jack..

    I used to think the same thing about plea bargains as you. Until I got into the system so to speak and I can tell you they actually do more good than bad.

    Many time (most times) the person will receive the same or nearly the same sentence as if they were convicted of the more serious crime. This is because of sentencing guidlines. They are complicated for the attorneys to figure out.

    Our "reasonable doubt" standard is a difficult one to overcome in many cases. It has been abanded in many other "civilized" countries. The whole "it's better for 10 guilty people to go free than one innocent person to get convicted". I can't argue with the logic. Even if it makes the job exponential more difficult. Sometimes a slam dunk lesser is better then risking a loss if it goes to jury.

    Ever hear the term "jury nullification"?

    I have some stories of a couple cases on both sides of that exact deal.

    It would be great to run every case to the max no matter what. It isn't practical and would cause a slow, backlogged system to grind to a crashing halt. It sucks but it is.

    Joe

    Edit: Cuz my grammar ain't so good.
    JC Custom WoodWorks

    For best results, try not to do anything stupid.

    "So this is how liberty dies...with thunderous applause." - Padmé Amidala "Star Wars III: The Revenge of the Sith"

  6. #51
    Well if it happens ( plea bargain ) according to what you say then I'm fine with that part of it .. I'm not a lawyer , nor " in the system " so to speak , dont claim to be ..

    I think for the most part gun control ( something I am much in the loop with ) is disarmament of law abiding citizens by politicians who use it ( and other issues ) to stir people up to carry out their own agenda , which , many times is more in their interests than the public interest ..

    However the facts dont support their logic ( or lack of it ) ..

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Elimbah, SE Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    128
    Perhaps Richard Jeni would still be alive today, if guns were not so easily available to people, despite the fact that clinical depression affects a sizeable proportion of the population at some time in their lives. I suppose some Americans, in their pursuit of individual freedom at any cost, would be happy that his life was the price that had to be paid so that others could be free to own guns.

    David Dundas

  8. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Hayes, Virginia
    Posts
    14,760
    Lets keep on topic folks, this thread is about Article 2 of the Constitution and its legal interpretation.

    .

  9. #54
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Elimbah, SE Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    128
    I thought the thread related to the Second Amendment to the Constitution:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    To an outsider like myself, it appears self-evident that the first part of this sentence demonstrates that the right to keep and bear arms is only granted in the context of service in a well-regulated militia, such as the National Guard. But then, what would I know?

    David Dundas



  10. #55
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Plymouth County, Massachusetts
    Posts
    2,933
    Quote Originally Posted by David Dundas
    Perhaps Richard Jeni would still be alive today, if guns were not so easily available to people, despite the fact that clinical depression affects a sizeable proportion of the population at some time in their lives. I suppose some Americans, in their pursuit of individual freedom at any cost, would be happy that his life was the price that had to be paid so that others could be free to own guns.

    David Dundas
    A couple weeks ago, a man and his wife died. It was a murder-suicide. They were found with zip-ties around their necks.
    If you want to kill, you don't need the second amendment.
    PS. You read that right....must of taken a great effort to die with that method.
    Gary K.
    Last edited by Gary Keedwell; 03-12-2007 at 7:53 AM.

  11. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Savannah, GA
    Posts
    4,422
    Quote Originally Posted by David Dundas
    To an outsider like myself, it appears self-evident that the first part of this sentence demonstrates that the right to keep and bear arms is only granted in the context of service in a well-regulated militia, such as the National Guard. But then, what would I know?

    David Dundas


    The National Guard does serve the same purpose as the original state and local militias. As you are an outsider, you may not be aware that our National Guard is currently being called upon to support our Regular Army, and handle natural disastors, and keep the peace when required at a local level. This being the case the Guard is stretched a little thin currently. If it became necessary for well regulated State and local militias to form and defend the citizens of our country, militia members would be required to provide their own arms and amunition. As there is no legislation to abolish militias, we should be prepared for the call to arms at any and all times. Being prepared means being armed.
    Last edited by Belinda Barfield; 03-12-2007 at 10:00 AM.

    “Life is not so short but that there is always time enough for courtesy and chivalry.” —Ralph Waldo Emerson

    Everybody knows what to do with the devil but them that has him. My Grandmother
    I had a guardian angel at one time, but my little devil got him drunk, tattooed, and left him penniless at a strip club. I have not had another angel assigned to me yet.
    I didn't change my mind, my mind changed me.
    Bella Terra

  12. #57
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lafayette, IN
    Posts
    4,563
    David, read the first and fourth amendments with regard to who "the people" are. It's clear that "the people" refers to individual citizens, not State-controlled Militias. Militias at the time were ad hoc gatherings of townspeople and farmers, who practiced their weaponry skills ("well regulated"), and brought their own muskets to the fight. This is also pretty clear from many of the writings of the Founding Fathers at or around the time the Constitution was drafted.

    Ironic--this is post #1492 for me...
    Jason

    "Don't get stuck on stupid." --Lt. Gen. Russel Honore


  13. #58
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Kutztown PA
    Posts
    1,255
    Quote Originally Posted by David Dundas
    Perhaps Richard Jeni would still be alive today, if guns were not so easily available to people, despite the fact that clinical depression affects a sizeable proportion of the population at some time in their lives. I suppose some Americans, in their pursuit of individual freedom at any cost, would be happy that his life was the price that had to be paid so that others could be free to own guns.

    David Dundas
    David following your reasoning, there should be no gun crime at all in Australia, correct? Isn't it true that you folks turned your guns in a few years ago?

    Speaking as a person with degrees in psychology, Bible, and post masters work in counseling, I can tell you right now that suicidal people are going to carry out their intent regardless of what is available to do it. It is the extremely rare case where someone will not carry out their intent because the "appropriate" weapon is not at hand. I can also tell you that there is a long range between depressed and suicidal.

    On the other hand, while trumpeted in the media, these cases are relatively rare. Jack H. commented earlier on in this thread that he would not let his children play at a house where there is a gun because of the risk. But for the year 2000, swimming pool deaths for children under the age of 14 numbered 800 compared to 80 for guns. Neither is a "good" number, but the fact is the presence of a swimming pool is 10 times more likely to result in the death of a child than the presence of a gun. But we don't see calls for bans or licensing of swimming pools, do we? The same goes for murder/suicide. There are always going to be people who are depressed enough or angry enough to take a life, their own or that of another. If they are really going to do it, a gun makes it easy at times, but the absence of a gun does not change their behavior, other that causing them to use another method.

    But to try and get this back on topic, look at what happens to people who cannot defend themselves from their own government. Look at the genocide inflicted in the USSR, Nazi Germany, China, Cambodia, Viet Nam, any African country you would care to name, etc. Why not stack up those numbers against a couple of individuals who misuse those things available to them?

    Look at what happened in LA right after Katrina. People had to defend themselves, and not just against looters. The friendly folks of the government decided it would be a good time to go house to house and collect weapons. Why? To consolidate their own power, not to "protect" people from themselves. As Belinda has already written, the local powers that be still can't control the area. Who is left to take care of people when even in good times a 911 call can mean a wait of an hour? And when it is the people running 911 who are going to take away your right to defend yourself besides not show up when you need them, what are you to do? Roll over and play dead? That is exactly what you will do when the bad guys who never seem to get the memo to turn in their guns show up.

    Bill

  14. #59
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Little Rock, AR.
    Posts
    642
    Quote Originally Posted by David Dundas
    I thought the thread related to the Second Amendment to the Constitution:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    To an outsider like myself, it appears self-evident that the first part of this sentence demonstrates that the right to keep and bear arms is only granted in the context of service in a well-regulated militia, such as the National Guard. But then, what would I know?

    David Dundas


    The Militia is comprised of two parts - the Organised Militia and the Non-organised Militia. The Organised portion consisted of people called into service by the State authorities for the purpose of defending the community. Called into service from the ranks of the unorganised Militia (Originally free white males between the ages of 17 and 45 - later expanded to include all free males and some women). Members call into service were EXPECTED to arrive equipped with their own arms, ammunition and supplies. So as you see, in order to form the militia mentioned in the first clause, The WHOLE of the people in the second clause needed to remain armed, and prepared. The purpose was to provide a ready defense force that was self trained, and self equipped.
    So clearly it cannot be included solely to protect "only" those in "the Militia".
    But there are also several references to why this was an important amendment in the writings detailing the history of the it's being included. The most fundimental of which was that, so long as the whole of the governed were armed, then our government could never become tyranical, lest they get replaced.

  15. #60
    Obviously, gun owners need to be responsible with their weapons.

    I'm struck by VP Cheney's shooting incident. Here's a man whom half the country feels is responsible enough to assume the presidency should that befall him.

    And yet even he isn't able to use a gun responsibly. He fired without looking properly.

    Jack

Similar Threads

  1. Welcome to new member Jonathan Szczepanski (who is buiding a new workshop)
    By Frank Pellow in forum General Woodworking and Power Tools
    Replies: 164
    Last Post: 06-06-2007, 10:42 PM
  2. No Justice for Imaginary Mystic Dwarves!
    By Damien Falgoust in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-04-2006, 9:34 AM
  3. Ipe Table is Center of Guest House Court
    By Mark Singer in forum General Woodworking and Power Tools
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-21-2004, 6:33 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •