Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Full of Win, Jun 28, 2010.
Woo Hoo, we won. Score one for the good guys!
Yes! Take that, Daley!
I'm so waiting for his response to this. His cluelessness will be epic.
Are you telling me Chicago didn't allow people to bear arms ?
Good. I'm loathe to see any rights taken away. The problem isn't the firearms, it's the lunatic set of beliefs surrounding gun culture within the US and an apalling rate of child poverty.
The gun nuts usually aren't the ones shooting people though. I also don't believe poverty is an excuse, poor parenting perhaps.
Yes....but not for long
Me, too. I don't think he'll comply short of a court order mandating he be goose-walked right off a plank from Meigs Field into the mouth of an Asian Carp.
This guy is a mafia-puppet autocrat. I don't seeing him doing what the Supreme Court says he must anytime soon.
Of course, there are the legal distinctions about what comes next. Even if Daley wasn't a buffoonish semi-literate hack, this decision will still lead to more suits to determine precisely what incorporation of the 2nd Amendment means in practice.
That's what we're telling you.
Well if that's the case then I agree with the Supreme Court's decision.
We've been waiting a long time for Daley to get this smackdown from the feds.
I like that this decision reduces the "states rights" arguments that have been cropping up lately.
No, states can not restrict constitutional protections... like privacy, equal protection, etc...
Exactly. Oh- Daley's gonna be foaming at the mouth!
It's no big deal, all they have to do is pass gun restrictions that the ruling allows. The net affect won't be that much if the population wants gun restrictions.
On the other hand, this decision makes it a lot harder for the Prop 8 case or many others where states are trying to restrict abortion, gay marriage, and many other issues.
They're already scrambling to figure it out. Bottom line- they can no longer ban guns. That's a good thing.
they can ban ammo
or gun power...
Wait a sec, a state (or, city, in this instance) makes a law that's unconstitutional, the SCOTUS overturns it, and everyone, including the state's rights small government conservatives are okay with the big federal government overturning it. A state makes a law banning gay marriage that's unconstitutional and the state's rights small government conservatives label any attempt to have that ruled unconstitutional is a power grab by the activist judges in the federal government and the decision should be left up to the states. Seems like the right can't have it both ways.
I'm fine with the SCOTUS decision, but if Prop 8 ever makes it to the SCOTUS and it's ruled as unconstitutional, effectively legalizing gay marriage nationwide, I hope every single state's right convervative will remember this and ****. Of course, they won't, but I can dream, right?
They can try, but this law was already unpopular. Daley would be seriously shooting himself in the foot (no pun intended).
You are 100% correct.
Poor parenting is a symptom and a cause. It's recursive, too. You can't expect an excellent parent in those situations. Something has to change to alter the status quo.
Widely available birth control would be a good start, I can't see people living in poverty wanting to get pregnant and bring a kid into that situation until they can get out of it themselves, but I could be wrong.
That would only do so much. If you grow up learning irresponsibility and immediate gratification, you can never be bothered to actually take the pill or put on the condom.
Only arm da bears!
YG: I can tell you their justification already. There is a constitutional right to bear arms, there is not a constitutional right to get married.
Don't agree with it, but that's the reasoning.
Back on topic: About time, SCOTUS!
Now they ought to address the public spaces (Universities, libraries, etc) that feel the need to ban a Constitutionally protected act (carrying a weapon.)
If they want to deny citizen's their rights, then the Fed ought deny them their funding.
Perhaps the bigger story of the day...
Today, nearly half (4) Supreme Court Justices voted AGAINST the 2nd Ammendment of the Constitution of the United States:
Imagine that, all of those considered by many to be the liberal activist judges (including Obama's first appointee, Sotomayor) who tend to try and MAKE law instead of interpreting it. Anyone in this forum want to provide any estimates as to how Kagan might have voted?
Glad to see gun rights upheld.