Holy hell!!!

Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
That's...

itsbob said:
DC can still require an individual to obtain a license to have a gun in their home.
Click to expand...

...right and they can also set the terms and conditions of that license and what type of arms it approves.

Revolvers come back into vogue. After you complete the annaul or semi annual or monthly requirments to keep and maintain that license.
 
R

RadioPatrol

Guest
Dictionary of the English Language 107 (4th ed.) (hereinafter Johnson). Timothy Cunningham’s important 1771 legal dictionary defined “arms” as “any thing that a man wears for his defence, or takes into his hands, or useth in wrath to cast at or strike another.” 1 A New and Complete Law Dictionary
(1771); see also N. Webster, American Dictionary of the English Language (1828) (reprinted 1989) (hereinafter Webster) (similar).
Click to expand...



Can I have my RPG now ............ :elaine:
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Lol!

the state constitutional provisions analogous to the Second Amendment
that identify private-use purposes for which theindividual right can be asserted. See post, at 12.) That analysis is faulty. A purposive qualifying phrase that contradicts the word or phrase it modifies is unknown this side of the looking glass (except, apparently, in some courses on Linguistics). If “bear arms” means, as we think, simply the carrying of arms, a modifier can limitthe purpose of the carriage (“for the purpose of self-defense” or “to make war against the King”). But if “bear arms” means, as the petitioners and the dissent think, the
16 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
Opinion of the Court
carrying of arms only for military purposes, one simply cannot add “for the purpose of killing game.” The right “tocarry arms in the militia for the purpose of killing game” is worthy of the mad hatter. Thus, these purposive qualifying
phrases positively establish that “to bear arms” is not limited to military use.11
Click to expand...

:lmao:
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
That's...

Lugnut said:
Shoot nothing wrong with that. I can reload a S&W 610 about as fast as I can reload a Glock 22. :biggrin:

Revolvers are the muts nuts, mate!
Click to expand...

...not the point. If you accept that a revolver is OK if a Glock with a 15 round mag is not, then you accept that a 4 cylinder is OK if 8 is too much, that two bathrooms is fine if 3 offends.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
I don't think...

...Stephens and Scalia are having lunch together today.

14Faced with this clear historical usage, JUSTICE STEVENS resorts to the bizarre argument that because the word “to” is not included before“bear” (whereas it is included before “petition” in the First Amendment),
the unitary meaning of “to keep and bear” is established. Post, at 16, n. 13. We have never heard of the proposition that omittingrepetition of the “to” causes two verbs with different meanings to become one. A promise “to support and to defend the Constitution ofthe United States” is not a whit different from a promise “to supportand defend the Constitution of the United States.”
Click to expand...

:lmao:
 
Lugnut

Lugnut

I'm Rick James #####!
Larry Gude said:
...not the point. If you accept that a revolver is OK if a Glock with a 15 round mag is not, then you accept that a 4 cylinder is OK if 8 is too much, that two bathrooms is fine if 3 offends.
Click to expand...

Yup I agree, that's why I pointedly ignored the rest of your post and ONLY quoted the bit about revolvers. :biggrin:
 
itsbob

itsbob

I bowl overhand
Larry Gude said:
...right and they can also set the terms and conditions of that license and what type of arms it approves.

Revolvers come back into vogue. After you complete the annaul or semi annual or monthly requirments to keep and maintain that license.
Click to expand...

Or just charge you $2500 or more a year for a license
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Well...

itsbob said:
Or just charge you $2500 or more a year for a license
Click to expand...

...I'm looking for the part that protects us from undue burdens whose only intent are the same as the original DC law; prohibition.

It is my thought that Heller will put a stop to all manner of shenanigans while allowing for reasonable requirements.
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Breyer...

...scares the hell out of me.


Second, the self-defense interest in maintaining loaded handguns in the home to shoot intruders is not the primary
interest, but at most a subsidiary interest, that the Second Amendment seeks to serve. The Second Amendment’s
language, while speaking of a “Militia,” says nothing
of “self-defense.”
Click to expand...

He sees a right to self defense and protecting your property as, at most, a subsidiary interest of the Second Amendment.

Thus, the primary interest is to serve the state.

Stalin could not agree more.

:jameo:
 
chernmax

chernmax

NOT Politically Correct!!
vraiblonde said:
Sure, but the precedent is set. So it would be pretty simple for gun owners to sue for their rights without ridiculous restrictions.
Click to expand...

When this ruling came out, O'Malley probably accidentally shot the rubber band he was holding into his eye... :whistle:
 
Larry Gude

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Vrail...

vraiblonde said:
Sure, but the precedent is set. So it would be pretty simple for gun owners to sue for their rights without ridiculous restrictions.
Click to expand...

...look at Heller itself, the case! Pretty simple? It's taken all this time and effort and wrangling to reach this point, after 200 some odd years, to get the SCOTUS to simple say that this;

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.
Click to expand...


...means 'yeah, there is an individual right to keep and bear arms.'

I'm not seeing where this thing is clear enough. It acknowledges a right of the state to license which automatically moves a weapon from a right to a privilege, akin to driving.

Obviously, I ain't no constitutional scholar or lawyer, so, we'll see. I'm just not seeing absolutes that I'd like to see.
 
R

RadioPatrol

Guest
Larry Gude said:
...means 'yeah, there is an individual right to keep and bear arms.'
Click to expand...



All thanks to Miller .... (from what I understand) as the starting point of Gun Control ....

or the bastardization of the Commerce Clause .... in defining Gun Free School Zones ..... effects commerce , Hmm yeah ok ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top