Replies: 28
| visibility 686
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
Justice Stevens advocates repealing the 2nd Amendment
Mar 27, 2018, 9:38 AM
|
|
In a NYT Op Ed linked below, the retired Justice advocates repealing the 2nd Amendment. What he tacitly admits is that Justice Scalia's Heller decision is the law of the land and all of these protests are pointless in view thereof unless the goal and end result is repeal.
But, unless he's so far gone and/or removed from politics, he has to realize there 3/4 of the States will never support repeal. None of the Southern states nor many of the Western states would support repeal.
By any rational view, the NRA has already won.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html
|
|
|
|
All-In [42196]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38272
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Repealing the 2nd Amendment is rather extremist...
Mar 27, 2018, 9:42 AM
|
|
And not what the demonstrators are calling for. It's also very dangerous in this nation. There are common sense measures that can be adopted without doing what Stevens is proposing.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111631]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73776
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Repealing the 2nd Amendment is rather extremist...
Mar 27, 2018, 9:44 AM
|
|
repealing the second does not necessarily mean guns will be banned. We are no Japan and Australia yet
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
if the 2nd amendment were repealed, in a matter of days
Mar 27, 2018, 9:49 AM
|
|
if not before, at least 1/3 of the states would have total gun bans in place or otherwise have draconian registration procedures.
One further obstacle that will be faced by any ban is the Takings Clause. This was a problem when Tommy Guns were banned a 100 years ago. In fact, in order to avoid having to pay just compensation, many Tommy Guns were grandfathered in and were allowed to survive the ban.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111631]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73776
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: if the 2nd amendment were repealed, in a matter of days
Mar 27, 2018, 10:46 AM
|
|
aren't we Ok with states right? I am
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
of course. states have a general police power
Mar 27, 2018, 10:56 AM
|
|
up to the limits of the Constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111631]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73776
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: of course. states have a general police power
Mar 27, 2018, 11:39 AM
|
|
so if the 2nd were repealed, would you agree that most states would not place a ban on guns?
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
Re: of course. states have a general police power
Mar 27, 2018, 11:46 AM
|
|
I would agree that the states would have the right to ban guns and that a majority would not ban all guns. Some states would, however, ban all guns.
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111631]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73776
Joined: 9/10/03
|
agree, and
Mar 27, 2018, 11:53 AM
|
|
it would certainly make for some interesting gubernatorial and state senate races
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
are you sure? the loudest voices
Mar 27, 2018, 9:46 AM
[ in reply to Repealing the 2nd Amendment is rather extremist... ] |
|
are calling for gun bans.
The Heller decision allows reasonable background checks, the ban on certain modifications, the ban on unusual weapons (cannon, tanks, etc...), the ban on automatic weapons, and potentially new bans on certain semi-automatic rifles.
But the hyperbolic rhetoric and signs/posters are about gun bans which are per se unconstitutional.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42196]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38272
Joined: 11/30/98
|
The people leading this movement...
Mar 27, 2018, 10:36 AM
|
|
Are not calling for a repeal of the 2nd Amendment. That's a lie being pushed by the other side to scare the public into thinking they are.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [79429]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63272
Joined: 10/30/05
|
Does anyone actually believe that's not the end game though?
Mar 27, 2018, 10:47 AM
|
|
If a ban isn't the ultimate goal why is nobody in this movement bothering to question why the last assault weapons ban didn't really do anything?
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
Ban of certain types of weapons is their goal.
Mar 27, 2018, 10:54 AM
|
|
They would say the AR15 is one of those. They want certain style of weapons banned. They don't want your shotgun.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [79429]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63272
Joined: 10/30/05
|
Not yet, but what happens when they figure out that my AR
Mar 27, 2018, 11:00 AM
|
|
is more or less functionally the same as my pistols? They're going to want those too. And yes, I wholeheartedly believe they want my shotgun as well. They might not straight up say it yet, but they will. It's not very hard to see what the intentions are here.
And again, why no acknowledgement of the last time this was tried if it's truly only about certain types of guns?
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
I don't think many Americans woud take that stance...
Mar 27, 2018, 11:13 AM
|
|
of wanting all weapons. Moreover, they know how impossible that would be.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [79429]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63272
Joined: 10/30/05
|
But you've got a fairly decent sized group that is very
Mar 27, 2018, 11:30 AM
|
|
vocal who does want that, people who are on the fence about it will be pressured to toe the line, and they will. I think this is one of those things that if you give an inch, you'll lose a mile. It's an emotional issue for many people, and people make stupid decisions under emotional duress....Like willingly disarming themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
"doubt Congress will act" lets be clear - Schumer
Mar 27, 2018, 11:37 AM
|
|
is the road block to any gun reform. Schumer has Democrat senators up for reelection in conservative red states who would lose if he/she voted for any gun control. Schumer will not allow a vote on any Democrat proposal.
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [79429]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63272
Joined: 10/30/05
|
And here I thought nobody wanted to take my guns...
Mar 27, 2018, 11:44 AM
[ in reply to It seems in reent Fox Polls... ] |
|
60 percent want a ban on "assault" weapons (which nobody can define) AND semi automatic weapons? I don't know exactly how many of the guns on the market today are semi-auto, but it's a whole lot of them. At least half. It's an emotional issue in that people aren't willing to take time to understand the details, they just want something done regardless of how effective it would be and the long term ramifications.
Which brings me back to my initial point, why no acknowledgement of the shortfalls from the last time these supposed "common sense" laws were tried?
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [48078]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 49059
Joined: 5/16/04
|
I think they think....
Mar 27, 2018, 11:50 AM
|
|
there is no perfect solution, but they believe there are reasonable steps that will help to an extent save lives.
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7207]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9438
Joined: 12/18/13
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [42196]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 38272
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
ignorance (or willful blindness) - just like the
Mar 27, 2018, 12:18 PM
|
|
"conservatives" who during have disdain for the 4th Amendment stating "if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about"
those conservatives are as ignorant of the consequences of wholesale abandoning the 4th Amendment as are these snowflakes are of abandoning the 2nd Amendment.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83127]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 80161
Joined: 11/29/99
|
Link?***
Mar 27, 2018, 1:29 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34113]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33621
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: Justice Stevens advocates repealing the 2nd Amendment
Mar 27, 2018, 11:03 AM
|
|
Why would Stevens need to "tacitly admit" that Heller is the law? Of course it is.
The protests aren't pointless, however, primarily because Heller is consistent with the imposition of gun regulations. Scalia said this explicitly.
For instance:
Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues. Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should 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.
We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of “dangerous and unusual weapons.”
It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service--M-16 rifles and the like--may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [47799]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 44519
Joined: 9/5/02
|
you really think those protesters would be happy
Mar 27, 2018, 11:12 AM
|
|
some peripheral regulations? the ones I've seen and heard (and I'm watching MSNBC) want to ban guns.
you people defending these rallies as not about banning guns sound like someone defending the anti-abortion rallies. Lets be clear, pro lifers want to ban abortions. They see a ban on partial birth abortions as a first step - but only a first step.
Same thing with these protesters. They are not protesting so that only background checks are enhanced or so that new sales on semi-automatic rifles cease. Particularly with the latter example, that would be meaningless as there are millions of extant rifles.
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34113]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 33621
Joined: 9/13/99
|
Re: you really think those protesters would be happy
Mar 27, 2018, 12:34 PM
|
|
Neither you nor I can say for sure what would make each and every protester happy, but I can guarantee that the answer is different for different protesters.
Even if the 2nd Amendment will never be repealed, at least some (and I would guess all) protesters would be delighted if they successfully encouraged stricter gun laws, even within the parameters of Heller. If gun deaths decrease after the new regulations are enacted, that's a pretty big success (especially for the not dead people).
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64837]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 22718
Joined: 9/27/04
|
I read this as Jada Stevens advocates repealing the 2nd Amen
Mar 27, 2018, 12:19 PM
|
|
I was thinking, "Dayum Trump! That's a serious upgrade from Stormy!"
|
|
|
|
Replies: 28
| visibility 686
|
|
|