Gun Control: Shiny Toy Guns

[Big Jim P]

N O N C O M P L I A N C E

It's a wonderful thing.

I have adopted a policy of court disruption as well, mistry every case I serve as a juror on.

Jury Nullification is an option as well.

Which is also a damn good way to get out of jury duty as well.

[Big Jim P]

So what well regulated militia are you a part of?

Do you still not know what well regulated means?

Or militia?

[Dylar]

Gun control is an affront to the American national spirit and nothing but a way to ensure that the poor and marginalized have even fewer and less effective tools to defend themselves with. "B-b-but muh state militia's and SCOTUS :'(" Yes, I am perfectly aware that in the past both the Supreme Court and state governments have tried to curtail the ability for the poor and marginalized the ability to defend themselves and fight back against those who would do them harm (the KKK, legitimately murderous CEO's, etc). "It's not an individual right tho!!!" "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Emphasis mine. The right of the people. IE of individuals, just as that phrase is interpreted for the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment. Unless we can actually curtail the right to assembly and freedom of speech for individuals now as well? Perhaps the Fourth Amendment truly doesn't apply to individuals now?

But lets say we want to go the route of state's rights for gun control as this really only applies to the federal government. Wunderbar! Now social conservatives can begin clawing back all the advancements made over the past decades, because if Due Process is axed for gun rights its axed for all of them. If I were a rabid social conservative, I'd love for Democrats to fully embrace the state's rights argument and actually win. It'd be hilarious and juicy irony, not to mention one of the greatest cases of being hoisted by their own petard. The rights enshrined for American citizens are not a buffet. You don't just get to pick and chose which ones you're willing to protect and which ones you're willing to tread all over.

So what well regulated militia are you a part of?

The U.S Citizens. Well-regulated militias doesn't translate into the Army or National Guard. If it did mean that, then why would the U.S government give itself the right to bear arms?

[Gig em Aggies]

Gun control is an affront to the American national spirit and nothing but a way to ensure that the poor and marginalized have even fewer and less effective tools to defend themselves with. "B-b-but muh state militia's and SCOTUS :'(" Yes, I am perfectly aware that in the past both the Supreme Court and state governments have tried to curtail the ability for the poor and marginalized the ability to defend themselves and fight back against those who would do them harm (the KKK, legitimately murderous CEO's, etc). "It's not an individual right tho!!!" "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Emphasis mine. The right of the people. IE of individuals, just as that phrase is interpreted for the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment. Unless we can actually curtail the right to assembly and freedom of speech for individuals now as well? Perhaps the Fourth Amendment truly doesn't apply to individuals now?

But lets say we want to go the route of state's rights for gun control as this really only applies to the federal government. Wunderbar! Now social conservatives can begin clawing back all the advancements made over the past decades, because if Due Process is axed for gun rights its axed for all of them. If I were a rabid social conservative, I'd love for Democrats to fully embrace the state's rights argument and actually win. It'd be hilarious and juicy irony, not to mention one of the greatest cases of being hoisted by their own petard. The rights enshrined for American citizens are not a buffet. You don't just get to pick and chose which ones you're willing to protect and which ones you're willing to tread all over.

You being snarky there Canstan?

[Canstan II]

Gun control is an affront to the American national spirit and nothing but a way to ensure that the poor and marginalized have even fewer and less effective tools to defend themselves with. "B-b-but muh state militia's and SCOTUS :'(" Yes, I am perfectly aware that in the past both the Supreme Court and state governments have tried to curtail the ability for the poor and marginalized the ability to defend themselves and fight back against those who would do them harm (the KKK, legitimately murderous CEO's, etc). "It's not an individual right tho!!!" "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Emphasis mine. The right of the people. IE of individuals, just as that phrase is interpreted for the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment. Unless we can actually curtail the right to assembly and freedom of speech for individuals now as well? Perhaps the Fourth Amendment truly doesn't apply to individuals now?

But lets say we want to go the route of state's rights for gun control as this really only applies to the federal government. Wunderbar! Now social conservatives can begin clawing back all the advancements made over the past decades, because if Due Process is axed for gun rights its axed for all of them. If I were a rabid social conservative, I'd love for Democrats to fully embrace the state's rights argument and actually win. It'd be hilarious and juicy irony, not to mention one of the greatest cases of being hoisted by their own petard. The rights enshrined for American citizens are not a buffet. You don't just get to pick and chose which ones you're willing to protect and which ones you're willing to tread all over.

So what well regulated militia are you a part of?

1) The American people are collectively considered to be the militia in question 2) The militia is why the right exists, but the right is still held for individuals. The right of ********the people********* shall not be infringed. It's not the right of the state's government or the right of the militia. The First Amendment and Fourth Amendment use that exact same language and those are considered individual rights, so guess what that means.

[Washington Resistance Army]

So what well regulated militia are you a part of?

The U.S Citizens. Well-regulated militias doesn't translate into the Army or National Guard. If it did mean that, then why would the U.S government give itself the right to bear arms?

Specifically it meant "in working order", in this context referring to being well armed and knowing how to use your weapons. I used to have a link saved that had several other examples of the phrase being used that way during the 1700/1800's but sadly the site is no longer active.

A quick breeze through some of the other stuff that Madison wrote makes it pretty clear that the "militia" and the "people" are one and the same.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Gun control is an affront to the American national spirit and nothing but a way to ensure that the poor and marginalized have even fewer and less effective tools to defend themselves with. "B-b-but muh state militia's and SCOTUS :'(" Yes, I am perfectly aware that in the past both the Supreme Court and state governments have tried to curtail the ability for the poor and marginalized the ability to defend themselves and fight back against those who would do them harm (the KKK, legitimately murderous CEO's, etc). "It's not an individual right tho!!!" "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Emphasis mine. The right of the people. IE of individuals, just as that phrase is interpreted for the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment. Unless we can actually curtail the right to assembly and freedom of speech for individuals now as well? Perhaps the Fourth Amendment truly doesn't apply to individuals now?

But lets say we want to go the route of state's rights for gun control as this really only applies to the federal government. Wunderbar! Now social conservatives can begin clawing back all the advancements made over the past decades, because if Due Process is axed for gun rights its axed for all of them. If I were a rabid social conservative, I'd love for Democrats to fully embrace the state's rights argument and actually win. It'd be hilarious and juicy irony, not to mention one of the greatest cases of being hoisted by their own petard. The rights enshrined for American citizens are not a buffet. You don't just get to pick and chose which ones you're willing to protect and which ones you're willing to tread all over.

So what well regulated militia are you a part of?

The United States adult population.

[Canstan II]

Gun control is an affront to the American national spirit and nothing but a way to ensure that the poor and marginalized have even fewer and less effective tools to defend themselves with. "B-b-but muh state militia's and SCOTUS :'(" Yes, I am perfectly aware that in the past both the Supreme Court and state governments have tried to curtail the ability for the poor and marginalized the ability to defend themselves and fight back against those who would do them harm (the KKK, legitimately murderous CEO's, etc). "It's not an individual right tho!!!" "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Emphasis mine. The right of the people. IE of individuals, just as that phrase is interpreted for the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment. Unless we can actually curtail the right to assembly and freedom of speech for individuals now as well? Perhaps the Fourth Amendment truly doesn't apply to individuals now?

But lets say we want to go the route of state's rights for gun control as this really only applies to the federal government. Wunderbar! Now social conservatives can begin clawing back all the advancements made over the past decades, because if Due Process is axed for gun rights its axed for all of them. If I were a rabid social conservative, I'd love for Democrats to fully embrace the state's rights argument and actually win. It'd be hilarious and juicy irony, not to mention one of the greatest cases of being hoisted by their own petard. The rights enshrined for American citizens are not a buffet. You don't just get to pick and chose which ones you're willing to protect and which ones you're willing to tread all over.

You being snarky there Canstan?

More annoyed at, primarily Democrats, trying to strip people of one of their rights and exhausted that this little charade has to keep being repeated time and time again.

[Canstan II]

The U.S Citizens. Well-regulated militias doesn't translate into the Army or National Guard. If it did mean that, then why would the U.S government give itself the right to bear arms?

Specifically it meant "in working order", in this context referring to being well armed and knowing how to use your weapons. I used to have a link saved that had several other examples of the phrase being used that way during the 1700/1800's but sadly the site is no longer active.

A quick breeze through some of the other stuff that Madison wrote makes it pretty clear that the "militia" and the "people" are one and the same.

Not to mention it would make sense given their philosophical foundations and many of the Founding Father's great distrust in standing armies.

[Big Jim P]

So, basically, Dems won't compromise.

"Compromise" in the gun debate really just boils down to us being expected to give things away with nothing in return, tbh.

Exactly. Which is why many gun rights supporters are no longer willing to "compromise".

[Dylar]

The U.S Citizens. Well-regulated militias doesn't translate into the Army or National Guard. If it did mean that, then why would the U.S government give itself the right to bear arms?

Specifically it meant "in working order", in this context referring to being well armed and knowing how to use your weapons. I used to have a link saved that had several other examples of the phrase being used that way during the 1700/1800's but sadly the site is no longer active.

A quick breeze through some of the other stuff that Madison wrote makes it pretty clear that the "militia" and the "people" are one and the same.

Not to mention that the definition of a militia is

generally an army or some other fighting organization of non-professional soldiers, citizens of a nation, or subjects of a state, who can be called upon for military service during a time of need, as opposed to a professional force of regular, full-time military personnel

[Topoliani]

Specifically it meant "in working order", in this context referring to being well armed and knowing how to use your weapons. I used to have a link saved that had several other examples of the phrase being used that way during the 1700/1800's but sadly the site is no longer active.

A quick breeze through some of the other stuff that Madison wrote makes it pretty clear that the "militia" and the "people" are one and the same.

Not to mention that the definition of a militia is

generally an army or some other fighting organization of non-professional soldiers, citizens of a nation, or subjects of a state, who can be called upon for military service during a time of need, as opposed to a professional force of regular, full-time military personnel

Wikipedia is for filthy commies

[Canstan II]

It's also worth mentioning that far more people die because of handguns as opposed to the AR-15. Many of them are young, around the ages of the recent victims of school shootings (a lot street gang members are less than 20 with most being in their mid to late teens). They don't care about the kid shot to do death with a Glock on some street corner in Baltimore as long as the "scary" AR is banned.

[Sovaal]

So, basically, Dems won't compromise.

"Compromise" in the gun debate really just boils down to us being expected to give things away with nothing in return, tbh.

But if you oppose such measures you must hate children! Why do you hate the children?/s

[Dylar]

Not to mention that the definition of a militia is

Wikipedia is for filthy commies

Not really

[Spirit of Hope]

Dicks Sporting goods has apparently decided to stop selling "assault" style rifles. And will require all gun purchases to be made by people over the age of 21.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Dicks Sporting goods has apparently decided to stop selling "assault" style rifles. And will require all gun purchases to be made by people over the age of 21.

Academy is going to do to Dicks what Dicks did to Sports Authority, calling it now. Bankruptcy here we come!

Also appropriate name is appropriate.

[Vassenor]

So what well regulated militia are you a part of?

1) The American people are collectively considered to be the militia in question 2) The militia is why the right exists, but the right is still held for individuals. The right of ********the people********* shall not be infringed. It's not the right of the state's government or the right of the militia. The First Amendment and Fourth Amendment use that exact same language and those are considered individual rights, so guess what that means.

So how is that militia well regulated?

[Washington Resistance Army]

1) The American people are collectively considered to be the militia in question 2) The militia is why the right exists, but the right is still held for individuals. The right of ********the people********* shall not be infringed. It's not the right of the state's government or the right of the militia. The First Amendment and Fourth Amendment use that exact same language and those are considered individual rights, so guess what that means.

So how is that militia well regulated?

Stop saying that like you know what it means, you don't.

[Kramanica]

1) The American people are collectively considered to be the militia in question 2) The militia is why the right exists, but the right is still held for individuals. The right of ********the people********* shall not be infringed. It's not the right of the state's government or the right of the militia. The First Amendment and Fourth Amendment use that exact same language and those are considered individual rights, so guess what that means.

So how is that militia well regulated?

Oh, this tripe again?

[Big Jim P]

So how is that militia well regulated?

Stop saying that like you know what it means, you don't.

Having read the thread (hopefully), she does. Like most gun-grabbers though, she refuses to acknowledge anything that doesn't fit the agenda.

[Gig em Aggies]

Dicks Sporting goods has apparently decided to stop selling "assault" style rifles. And will require all gun purchases to be made by people over the age of 21.

well I see a big drop in customers in the future, you know what's funny I actually wanted Dicks to bring a store to where I live in Central Texas but I think Academy will do just fine with selling me a rifle.

[Telconi]

"The will of the people is worthless and stupid" is an opinion, one I do not have any sort of obligation to justify to you.

And secondly if the founding fathers wished for the express will of the people to be always represented, why include a Bill of Rights?

Yes a worthless opinion. Shows how much you care about the founding principles. And how much argument you have against my point.

Also, there is nothing mutually exclusive about representing the will of the people and ensuring certain rights are protected. I don't know why you think there is. it's just a small limitation.

Well they haven't done so in states with UBCs, they're routinely ignored by pretty much everyone.

According to my research, the biggest problem is that the politicians don't want to enforce them, at least in Nevada. source. source

Sounds less like a problem inherent to UBCs than it does politics and NRA meddling as usual. THe second source also says that UBCs are working well in Deleware, so your absolute statement is false. (If you had qualified it a bit, It wouldn't have been). Plus it's apparently working better now in Oregon, since lawmakers and law enforcement sat down and hashed out how to enforce it. No good reason that couldn't be donme on the federal level, with say the FBI and justice department, or working with a variety of local police departments to come up with good ways to do so,

So it can work, as long as sufficient effort is put into it, evidence suggests. But, let me guess, if it takes work to make it work, it's bad and shouldn't be passed, right?

-Shrug- Your opinon, not mine.

Well, of course they aren't mutually exclusive, but the point is that there are situations where the will of the majority can and should be ignored in favor of protecting the rights of a minority.

As far as UBCs...

Ah, right, just make the local LE do it. Would this be the same local LE who refuses to enforce the existing law? Perhaps the same local LE who''s publicly stated they absolutely will not enforce any additional gun regulations? See, your problem is two fold, for one, it's logistically near impossible to enforce, after all, you simply cannot watch everyone all the time. And secpndly, a good number of LE doesn't care to enforce it, and won't make an arrest even if they DO stumble across it happening...

[Big Jim P]

Dicks Sporting goods has apparently decided to stop selling "assault" style rifles. And will require all gun purchases to be made by people over the age of 21.

well I see a big drop in customers in the future, you know what's funny I actually wanted Dicks to bring a store to where I live in Central Texas but I think Academy will do just fine with selling me a rifle.

I prefer to buy at the small locally owned gunshops personally The one in Rockdale can order me just about anything they don't have in stock.

[Telconi]

Stop saying that like you know what it means, you don't.

Having read the thread (hopefully), she does. Like most gun-grabbers though, she refuses to acknowledge anything that doesn't fit the agenda.

Why give up your snide shitpost just because it's factually wrong...

Also, I don't intend to get out of jury duty, after all I can't derail a trial I'm not a part of.