Re: Anti-Gun Hysteria!

On Tue, 3 Jul 2007 06:27:18 -0500, "Herb Martin" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:


"swamp" <swampmunge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:5vjj8359h41oe1ksk6dbc0rk1n7a94dq9t@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 02 Jul 2007 11:50:58 -0500, "RD (The Sandman)"
<rdsandman(spamlock)@comcast.net> wrote:


You're missing the point. You *don't* have to accept my opinion, and
shouldn't. In fact, you should have your own. You don't have to accept
court decisions either; you should have your own.

Everyone is entitle to their own opinion but everyone is not entitled to
their
own set of facts.

You live in an illogical fantasy world -- or are simple dishonest.

Are those my only options? ;)

Do you think SC justices are all that bright, or more knowledgeable
than you about all the issues they rule on? They make mistakes, just
like the rest of us.

No, but they set the limits and protect the Constitutionality of the law.

Sometimes. Sometimes not. You have far greater trust in them than I
do, which, frankly, is a little surprising.

We will have to live with that if they make a serious mistake on the RKBA
UNTIL we can institute a NEW Constitutional Amendment.

Notice, there is NO chance of instituting a repeal of the 2nd Amendment,
much less a countervailing prohibition that would override the State
Constitutions, but there is a very real -- admittedly difficult --
possibility
to add a NEW version of the 2nd Amendment that will protect the RKBA
if the Court screws up.

Your thoughts are uncoordinated. I agree the BoR is next to
untouchable. No SC, however liberal, would ever alter it. Why then,
would you want a "new" version of 2A? Or 1-10A for that matter?


And, they
only reaffirm 2A, and specifically avoid endorsing unlimited arms
ownership.

Nor do they deny it. You can't have it both ways.

Nor am I asking for it. They're "hand's off" because they're smarter
than the average bear. Not as smart as the BoR writers, tho.

Parker will change this -- one way or another -- if the District of Columbia
is willing to appeal.

More reading.. ok..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_v._District_of_Columbia

Is this acceptable to you?

Comments:

I agree w/ Judge Henderson's dissent, but he had the wrong reasons.
Legal experts agreed that even the NRA doesn't support unlimited arms.
More "scrutiny" before issue was suggested even by supporters.

Politically DC is being pressured to AVOID the appeal which will take place
during a Presidential election year, harming Democratic candidates though.

Interesting.. tho I counter-predict. Politicians on all sides will
work the issue in their favor. That's what they do.

Care to show where it expanded arms rights?

Expansion is NOT necessary -- the right is fundament and must not be
infringed already.

Restrictions much be ruled explicitly, but permission to exercise a right
require no such rulings.

Deny it all you want, but pro-gun is attempting to expand 2A rights.
Your opponents may be trying to restrict them.. but you've got 2A in
your "pocket." You worry too much.

Or who can own them? Can you
show specifically where they address handguns? Or do you wish to simply
continues to sit there spouting your opinion with no backup and expect us
to blindly accept it? You are something else, swamp.

No, I'm logical, and - as opposed to pro-gun - have never maintained
that my opinion on gun laws was anything other than opinion.

Swamp you have never demonstrated ANY significant ability with logic
or the rules of evidence (either formal or informal).

You have repeately refused to treat any subject logically or to use facts
and evidence to support you case, while ignoring those presented to you.

Court rulings aren't evidence, and anything but data. Until you guys
figure this out you'll have many logical people questioning you.

-- swamp
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Anti-Gun Hysteria!
    ... court decisions either; ... Everyone is entitle to their own opinion but everyone is not entitled to ... Notice, there is NO chance of instituting a repeal of the 2nd Amendment, ... You have repeately refused to treat any subject logically or to use facts ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: OT - Tell Bush: "Dont blame Hurricane victims, help them!"
    ... That was my opinion based on experience. ... Do you have any evidence, ... Those are the facts. ... >> Because true conservatives don't have liberal friends. ...
    (rec.crafts.metalworking)
  • Re: Professor Sir Roy Meadow wins
    ... able to give their honest opinion without fear of retribution. ... sometimes unpopular opinions in the course of giving evidence in court. ... of a witness in respect of evidence he gives in a court of law. ...
    (uk.legal)
  • Re: The case for circumcision
    ... There is a difference between fact and opinion. ... correct assessment of the facts, ... That anti-circ activists can't do that shows that ... did you only look at evidence that favored your case?. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: The case for circumcision
    ... There is a difference between fact and opinion. ... correct assessment of the facts, ... That anti-circ activists can't do that shows that ... did you only look at evidence that favored your case?. ...
    (sci.math)
Loading