Supreme Court strikes down D.C. handgun ban

[PastaJoe]

If you applied that same logic evenly, it seems to me that the United States government should ban automobiles, as they kill significantly more people than firearms do in this country every year. Where would you put your bumper sticker?

 

The primary purpose of a car is transportation, not to injure. The primary purpose of a gun is to injure.

[Brandon]

The primary purpose of a car is transportation, not to injure. The primary purpose of a gun is to injure.

 

You can argue purpose all day. The results are basically the same.

[KD in CA]

Wow...only 44% of the USSC chose to throw the constitution under the bus. What a great day for our country.

[SD Jarhead]

And then there's this gem here in California:

 

"Also en route to the Senate Appropriations Committee is Assembly Bill 2235. Passed by the Senate Public Safety Committee earlier this week, AB2235 would prohibit the sale of handguns other than "owner-authorized (or “smart”) handguns"-- that is, handguns with a permanent, programmable biometric feature that renders the firearm useless unless activated by the authorized user. No proven, viable handgun of this type has ever been developed. Introduced by Assemblyman Mark DeSaulnier (D-11), AB2235 would require the Attorney General to report to the Governor and Legislature on the availability of owner-authorized handguns. Once the Attorney General finds that these guns are available, only “owner-authorized” handguns could be approved for sale in California."

 

Hmm, why don't we pass a law that, in the interest of stopping Global Warming, bans the sale of automobiles with wheels in favor of water fueled, flying cars? It should be noted that no water powered flying car has been developed yet, but we'll have the Attorney General stand watch for them and when he sees one, he can report to the Legislature, we could ban the ones with wheels. :wallbash:

[jjamie12]

The primary purpose of a car is transportation, not to injure. The primary purpose of a gun is to injure.

Not necessarily in this case. I would argue that the primary purpose of this gun is 'defense'. This was a pretty narrow victory here, PJ, you should read the opinion. We're really talking about the ability for someone to legally have a handgun in their own home. Isn't everyone in agreement on this? Shouldn't anyone (within reason) be allowed to legally have a gun in their own home? How is this objectionable?

 

You can argue purpose all day. The results are basically the same.

Also true.

 

PJ- If you're truly concerned with the welfare of 'innocent people', couldn't you make a much bigger dent in society by banning bars or restaurants that serve alcohol? If people couldn't drink at bars, wouldn't that stop much (not all) of the drunk driving problem?

[Alaska Darin]

The primary purpose of a car is transportation, not to injure. The primary purpose of a gun is to injure.

Yet amazingly, over 200,000,000 guns owned in America never injure anyone.

 

Keep being afraid of inanimate objects while embracing those you should actually fear. Goddamn lemming.

[ExiledInIllinois]

That's quite an argument; allowing people to have handguns is worth the sacrifice of all the kids who die from handgun accidents. The NRA should put that on a bumper sticker.

 

Same thing with 911 and the +3,000 personal tragedies... The Constitution shouldn't be eviscerated.

 

Well, only if I say so...

[ExiledInIllinois]

Hold the parents responsible for negligence. Bottom line. How does someone not know how a stolen pistol gets into their house? That is the problem here-someone STOLE a weapon and it was found by a child.

 

Speaking for self, along with gun ownership comes responsibility. My weapons are kept in a gun safe that my kids do not know the combination to. Before touching any weapon they must recite the four safety rule of weapons handling to me...no kidding. I taught them to shoot at a young age.

 

It's just like driving a car. I've been impressing upon my oldest the great responsibility that earning a drivers license entails. Unfortunately for him he won't be getting his permit until at leat the end of next semester because he earned himself an 'F' in Spanish the final semester of the school year. I told him, if he's not responsible enough to earn decent grades, how can I trust him with a greater responsibility?

 

I know this is waaay off topic...sorry.

 

This we agree on... And you know what? Even though it was expressed by others first, in Obama's Father's Day speech you can find the argument for that responsibility. And before you criticize it, the point is that people are going to listen to him... That is a good thing... Put all the past "pissing contests aside."

 

What I am saying is that the burden is also the woman/wives of these men. Getting tough with the family and their husband/significant other is a must.

 

The breakdown of the family unit is at the core.

 

Call Obama the "Messiah" and mock him... We are at a point in history where people will actually listen and stop being mistrustful. That my friend is change.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Wow...only 44% of the USSC chose to throw the constitution under the bus. What a great day for our country.

 

See, even in victory of your beliefs... People still have to find a miserable twist, the glass "half empty" so to speak. I am totally with you on this argument KD, but man, let it go. It is a great day for the Constitution and the country!

 

My God!

 

[ExiledInIllinois]

Yet amazingly, over 200,000,000 guns owned in America never injure anyone.

 

Keep being afraid of inanimate objects while embracing those you should actually fear. Goddamn lemming.

 

[Wacka]

Except the "change " the Messiah spouts is F'n socialism and will totally ruin this country.

[KD in CA]

See, even in victory of your beliefs... People still have to find a miserable twist, the glass "half empty" so to speak. I am totally with you on this argument KD, but man, let it go. It is a great day for the Constitution and the country!

 

That's my point. It's not a 'great' day at all. It's a 'near miss of a total catastrophe'. Big difference in my book. Fuggin' A....what happens if the Messiah appoints the next Justice and this issue is on the block again in ten years? Anything short of a 9-0 vote is a travesty.

 

But at least there's a silver lining; the left wing idiots realize they need to deal with the fall-out that comes from their years of coddling criminals. Naturally they've picked the wrong way to deal with it, but what can you expect.

[SD Jarhead]

This we agree on... And you know what? Even though it was expressed by others first, in Obama's Father's Day speech you can find the argument for that responsibility. And before you criticize it, the point is that people are going to listen to him... That is a good thing... Put all the past "pissing contests aside."

 

What I am saying is that the burden is also the woman/wives of these men. Getting tough with the family and their husband/significant other is a must.

 

The breakdown of the family unit is at the core.

 

Call Obama the "Messiah" and mock him... We are at a point in history where people will actually listen and stop being mistrustful. That my friend is change.

 

Look, I never said I disagreed with the substance of the speech. I think he was on target with it. My and others point was why is He being celebrated for it while other black leaders were berated for saying the same thing a few short years earlier.

 

Two things here from me- First, I fully appreciate and am thrilled that we are at the point in our history where a black man can run for President. No kidding. This is a great day for our country. In fact it proves to me that all affirmative action policies should immediately cease, because he is demonstrates that with the right intelligence and determination, you can be whoever you want to be in this great nation of ours.

 

Second, I think he has done a masterful job running his campaign. I read an article in the Conservative magazine Rolling Stone the other day about how his campaign is being run, and I've got to give him props for it.

 

What I can't stand is his plans and ideas for running our country. The bottom line. He is a Socialist, and as has been discussed without end, he is just another Politician and the only change he'll bring if elected is a swing to the hard left. That is unacceptable to me. The fawning masses of lemmings both in the media and general population who actually believe his schtick and that he is somehow different is what troubles me most. That's why I will do whatever I can to pull down the curtain and expose the Wizard for what he is.

[UConn James]

Look, I never said I disagreed with the substance of the speech. I think he was on target with it. My and others point was why is He being celebrated for it while other black leaders were berated for saying the same thing a few short years earlier.

 

Two things here from me- First, I fully appreciate and an thrilled that we are at the point in our history where a black man can run for President. No kidding. This is a great day for our country. In fact it proves to me that all affirmative action policies should immediately cease, because he is demonstrates that with the right intelligence and determination, you can be whoever you want to be in this great nation of ours.

 

Second, I think he has done a masterful job running his campaign. I read an article in the Conservative magazine Rolling Stone the other day about how his campaign is being run, and I've got to give him props for it.

 

What I can't stand is his plans and ideas for running our country. The bottom line. He is a Socialist, and as has been discussed without end, he is just another Politician and the only change he'll bring if elected is a swing to the hard left. That is unacceptable to me. The fawning masses of lemmings both in the media and general population who actually believe his schtick and that he is somehow different is what troubles me most. That's why I will do whatever I can to pull down the curtain and expose the Wizard for what he is.

 

Wholeheartedly agree on Point the First. The campaign and support he's received has really shown how far we've come in a relatively short time period. Combine that with other statistics/scientific (mostly debunking) facts about race and I don't see a need for affirmative action. Much of the time when people cry racism, the actual cause of an incident is a judgment of the content of a person's character that MLK preached. When someone is going 80 in a 40 mph zone, blaring music with lyrics that exhort 'smacking your B word up' or raping women, I'm going to tend to knock off a few character points (and fwiw, I've seen way more white people than black in such situations). Obama is the pinnacle example of a meritocracy.

 

Second point, Rolling Stone is conservative? But yeah, he's by and large run an excellent campaign in his idiom. I'm probably not going to be voting for him, but like you, the reason isn't b/c he's black, it's that at this point I don't agree with enough of his policies (judging from his sketches since he's been purposefully vague) for him to earn my vote.

[UConn James]

The primary purpose of a car is transportation, not to injure. The primary purpose of a gun is to injure.

 

I've been an NRA lifer for 15 years now, have connections to several clubs with many members and I've never heard about anyone shooting someone, even in self-defense. The primary purpose of a gun is to be a tool of its operator, like anything else: knives, cars, pencils, gold clubs, et cetera.... Furthermore, its more specific purpose is to be either a sporting tool for target shooting (most of the use I've ever seen or heard of), or a portable method of self-defense (most of the time as a mere show of force/persuader).

 

In the wrong hands, it can do harm, just as many other tools can do. The key is that when you catch people using a gun in a crime you need to put them the f--- behind bars and keep them there. But often, the 5-year mandatory sentencing for crimes with a gun gets tossed out... and I'll give you a guess which side of the aisle that such leniency tends to come from. It used to floor me how the bleeding hearts acted all surprised when people with rap sheets the length of your arm keep committing crimes when they're let out of prison. Now I know better b/c it's just part of their agenda to keep gun violence on the front pages so they can get the ban they've been pining for for so long. It's pretty sick to toy with public safety as a means to an end.

[SD Jarhead]

Second point, Rolling Stone is conservative?

 

I thought for sure everyone would pick up on my sarcasm...!@#$ no that magazine's not conservative. Someone must've sent me a subscription because I started receiving it a few weeks ago. Instead of throwing it straight in the schit can, I give it a casual glance.

[/dev/null]

I thought for sure everyone would pick up on my sarcasm...!@#$ no that magazine's not conservative. Someone must've sent me a subscription because I started receiving it a few weeks ago. Instead of throwing it straight in the schit can, I give it a casual glance.

Might want to leave a couple copies in the bathroom. Just in case you run out of regular toilet paper

[Taro T]

That's quite an argument; allowing people to have handguns knives, cars, jarts is worth the sacrifice of all the kids who die from handgun knife, car, jart accidents. The NRA Moveon.org'ers should put that on a bumper sticker.

Fixed it for you.

[swede316]

So how does Obama feel? Here is what he answered on the Liberal Survey that he allegedly didn't fill out.

 

He against virtually anything to do with guns. If it was up to him the only guns we would have would be a BB gun and maybe not even that lucky. The guy can't be trusted. He says one thing but voted the complete opposite.

 

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3991

 

Asking gun owners to vote for Obama is like asking chickens to vote for Colonel Sanders.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

The power of Constitution should be protected. However, with that being said there still should be limits and regulations in place to protect the children, hot dogs and apple pie. It should never be black and white situation.

 

I'd be interested to hear your "shades of gray" opinion on the constitutionality of, say, Roe v. Wade.