S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,897
Posts550,568
Members14,458
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487 |
So tell us Ed, when the Supreme Court ruled in the Heller and McDonald cases, which amendment took precedence... the 2nd or the 10th?
Local laws that prohibited the ownership of certain firearms were struck down in D.C. and Chicago. The individual right to keep and bear arms for self defense was affirmed by the High Court. Have you bothered to read the 10th amendment to see what it says?
Oh sorry, I forgot you are an idiot who cannot understand even the most simple things.
A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101 |
so then, why do state and local gun laws through out the land continue to be on enforceable? could it be that those laws do not prohibit the ownership of certain classes of firearms, but only regulate ownership? duh... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487 |
The anti-gun laws in D.C. and Chicago were considered legal within those jurisdictions, and unfortunate people were prosecuted for violating them until a couple people named Heller and McDonald decided to fight it... and eventually these cases were decided by the Supreme Court.
You don't need to give me a link to the 10th Amendment idiot. I know what it says and what it means. If there was no 2nd Amendment, then under the 10th, states would be perfectly within their rights to regulate firearms which were not so regulated by the U.S. Constitution.
We have plenty of laws which reasonably and justifiably regulate ownership. Felons for example are not allowed to own or even attempt to purchase a firearm. Illegal immigrants like the one who shot and killed Kate Steinle may not possess guns. But the anti-gun politicians you support refuse to go after them, and instead concentrate their efforts on law abiding citizens.
What are the business hours of your gun shop Ed? What hours of business did you lie about on your FFL license application?
A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101 |
what you dont seem to want to acknowledge is that state and local laws that regulate ownership of firearms, without directly forbidding ownership of firearms, are not a violation of the federal charter...and these statutes have been settled law for many years.
for example, new york's sullivan law, which regulates ownership of handguns, has been in affect since 1911.
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065 |
Well, Brown Vs. Board of Education had been in effect for decades. But Earl Warren's SCOTUS tossed it out.
The current SCOTUS tossed out several state and city laws restricting citizens' right to keep and bear arms; Including Chicago's, Illionois', and Washington DC to name but a few.
I am glad to be here.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101 |
mikie: doubt if the sullivan law will ever be repealed...but after reading the following, one does wonder why it has lasted so long? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sullivan_Act
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065 |
eD none of the jurisdictions I listed repealed their gun laws. Their gun laws were declared unconstitutional by SCOTUS.
I am glad to be here.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 9,800 Likes: 101 |
mikie: as the sullivan law has been on the books since 1911, doubt if the court will declare it null and void... more likely, the court would rule against another, more recent, ny gun law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NY_SAFE_Actthe key issue is and should be prohibition vs regulation. weapons prohibition can be a violation of the second amendment. weapons regulation is not.
Last edited by ed good; 07/30/15 09:36 PM.
keep it simple and keep it safe...
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065 |
mikie: as the sullivan law has been on the books since 1911, doubt if the court will declare it null and void... Well, Plessy v. Ferguson had been in effect for decades. But Earl Warren's SCOTUS tossed it out in Brown vs. Board of education. The current SCOTUS tossed out several state and city laws restricting citizens' right to keep and bear arms; Including Chicago's, Illionois', and Washington DC to name but a few.
I am glad to be here.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487
Sidelock
|
OP
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,466 Likes: 487 |
Here's Anti-Gunner Ed Good, arguing in favor, once again, of Universal Background Checks: craig: confiscation of firearms in england is one thing. confiscation of firearms in the entire 50 united states is a whole nutter thang...first of all, we would no stand for it...and second, so long as we have the second amendment, that aint gonna happen...to fantasize otherwise, reeks of paranoia.
as for the states... historically, they have regulated firearms to the degree they deem necessary for public safety...however, no state has ever been able to actually forbid their citizens their federal constitutional right to keep and bear arms for self defense...the closes any have ever come to it is the recent ny safe act, which already has been challenged at the state court level, as a violation of the new york state charter. Of course, Ed Good is an FFL Dealer who is probably salivating at the idea of earning an easy $40.00 or so doing transfers every time a father or grandfather gives or passes down a gun to his kid or grandkid. And 10 guns equals $400.00 to the greedy torch artist who makes stupid excuses for cheating people who buy his loose doubles with a next to impossible return policy. This is also a guy who violates the BATF rules on having a brick and mortar business with regular store hours.
A true sign of mental illness is any gun owner who would vote for an Anti-Gunner like Joe Biden.
|
|
|
|
|