Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 81 to 97 of 97

Thread: Nightclub shooting in Ohio

  1. #81
    Consul Rokchick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    -32 degrees latitude, free, safe and warm
    Posts
    8,824

    Default

    So Blaze, the 9 dead? Point them out to me, I still can't find them.
    I'm glad I'm not judgemental like all you smug, superficial idiots

  2. #82
    Consul The Blazin1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Murica... **** yeah
    Posts
    6,847

    Default

    I have given you all pertinent information to find it; the fact that you can't find it just reinforces my claim.
    Quote Originally Posted by Baron D'Holbach View Post
    You should quote yourself. It's like liking your Facebook status or high-fiving yourself in the mirror.

    It's what I would do if I didn't have to keep mine exactly how it is for madsquirrels and erazer.

  3. #83
    Philosopher н-υ-п-т-ε-я's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    in my body of course
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Burninator View Post
    But not as a defense against thievery. The penalty for stealing is not bodily harm, and whether or not you are armed, the ethical thing to do while being robbed is to live through it, then seek justice.
    A thief might as well enjoy some killing/raping if they have weapons. how would you know that they won't do anything of such sort?

    I actually like using those sleep shots from a gun scientist use on animals. The criminal get sleep, then wake up and find themselves at jail!
    http://static.pokemoninfinity.com/im..._forum_sig.png

    trooper? recruit an army and get two recruits from me for your army...

    teacher?
    first five would receive 50 extra coins don't miss the chance...

  4. #84
    Consul Rokchick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    -32 degrees latitude, free, safe and warm
    Posts
    8,824

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Blazin1 View Post
    I have given you all pertinent information to find it; the fact that you can't find it just reinforces my claim.
    Nope, I think you misread the headlines. You saw 9 shot and thought 9 dead.
    http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting
    Specific googling of recent "9 dead ohio" comes up with 7 hits on the 9 wounded at the top.
    I'm glad I'm not judgemental like all you smug, superficial idiots

  5. #85
    Consul Sirveri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Burninator View Post
    Actually, as far as I know, the Second Amendment was never expanded to include states. The general rule is that the bill of rights/amendments are limitations on **Federal** government, not State governments. (The exception is any right that was expanded by Supreme Court decisions or is otherwise directed more at States than the Feds. Most of these exceptions fall in the category of voting rights.)

    TL;DR, I'm pretty sure States are within their constitutional rights to ban guns (unless that's prohibited by their State constitution). I can be corrected if there was a SCOTUS case that expanded the Second amendment to apply to States.
    Typically what you're looking for here is the Heller v DC decision, which passed along some of the 2nd provisions down to the people via the 14th. Actually it could be argued that the 14th limits state governments via the bill of rights as well. The rest of the protections were passed to the states via the due process clause using the 2010 McDonald v Chicago case.

    I personally disagree with the courts on this issue due to the clear intent expressed by the framers in the federalist papers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshyyy View Post
    There is some serious misquoting potential above.
    The rep system should be abolished.

  6. #86
    Consul The Burninator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The Great Garden State
    Posts
    8,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirveri View Post
    Typically what you're looking for here is the Heller v DC decision, which passed along some of the 2nd provisions down to the people via the 14th. Actually it could be argued that the 14th limits state governments via the bill of rights as well. The rest of the protections were passed to the states via the due process clause using the 2010 McDonald v Chicago case.

    I personally disagree with the courts on this issue due to the clear intent expressed by the framers in the federalist papers.
    Have there been any second amendment test cases in the Supreme Court though, where someone challenged a State restriction on their gun ownership and won?
    "The Universe speaks in many languages, but only one voice... It is the voice of our ancestors, speaking through us, and the voice of our inheritors, waiting to be born. It is the small, still voice that says: we are one. No matter the blood. No matter the skin. No matter the world. No matter the star. We are one. No matter the pain. No matter the darkness. No matter the loss. No matter the fear. We are one. Here, gathered together in common cause, we agree to recognise this singular truth and this singular rule: that we must be kind to one another. Because, each voice enriches us and ennobles us and each voice lost diminishes us. We are the voice of the Universe, the soul of creation, the fire that will light the way to a better future. We are one." ~G'kar

  7. #87
    Philosopher cofc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Back to Oz.
    Posts
    4,569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Burninator View Post
    Have there been any second amendment test cases in the Supreme Court though, where someone challenged a State restriction on their gun ownership and won?
    Mcdonald v Chicago. He literally mentioned it.

    Edit:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirveri View Post
    I personally disagree with the courts on this issue due to the clear intent expressed by the framers in the federalist papers.
    The intent of everyone allowed to have the same guns as the military?
    Last edited by cofc; 04-22-2017 at 12:20 AM.

  8. #88
    Consul Rokchick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    -32 degrees latitude, free, safe and warm
    Posts
    8,824

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cofc View Post
    The intent of everyone allowed to have the same guns as the military?
    Yay, so ICBMs all round then!
    I'm glad I'm not judgemental like all you smug, superficial idiots

  9. #89
    Philosopher cofc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Back to Oz.
    Posts
    4,569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rokchick View Post
    Yay, so ICBMs all round then!
    So say the writers of the constitution.

  10. #90
    Consul Sirveri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Burninator View Post
    Have there been any second amendment test cases in the Supreme Court though, where someone challenged a State restriction on their gun ownership and won?
    Sadly, cofc is correct, McDonald v Chicago. Heller v Dc applied it to federal jurisdiction and expanded the 2nd to include the concept of self defense, McDonald v Chicago applied it to the states in addition to federal enclaves.

    Probably should have been more clear about that, but I was stream of consciousness while also doing supporting research.

    Quote Originally Posted by cofc View Post
    Mcdonald v Chicago. He literally mentioned it.

    Edit:

    The intent of everyone allowed to have the same guns as the military?
    The intent posited by the federalist paper was to allow states to form what today would be recognized as the national guard.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rokchick View Post
    Yay, so ICBMs all round then!
    For the states, yes. It's not 100% clear how the founders would have reacted to the air force since the founders predate the air force by 150 years. That said, they did ban states from maintaining their own navies, which considering the power projection implications would seem to indicate no air force, however many state have an air national guard, so the reality likely sits in between the two, so it would be safe to say that aircraft designed for local or regional protection are acceptable but those designed for long range power projection are unacceptable, so yes to F-15's and A-10's; and no to B-52's and B-2's.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshyyy View Post
    There is some serious misquoting potential above.
    The rep system should be abolished.

  11. #91
    Consul The Burninator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The Great Garden State
    Posts
    8,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sirveri View Post
    Sadly, cofc is correct, McDonald v Chicago. Heller v Dc applied it to federal jurisdiction and expanded the 2nd to include the concept of self defense, McDonald v Chicago applied it to the states in addition to federal enclaves.
    Damn. So I suppose the road to banning guns would be more constitutionally fraught than I suspected.

    I'm surprised that no one has challenged NJ's laws, then. I suspect that there's still a backdoor way to do this, such as what my state does -- namely requires a license to own a gun, then restricts the ways to get at that license as much as possible, then regulates dozens of little things to make gun ownership awful. It's sort of what red states do with abortion but with gun ownership instead.

    But yeah, I don't read cofc's posts mostly because I generally want to learn things when I read, not intentionally kill brain cells. So I missed that .
    "The Universe speaks in many languages, but only one voice... It is the voice of our ancestors, speaking through us, and the voice of our inheritors, waiting to be born. It is the small, still voice that says: we are one. No matter the blood. No matter the skin. No matter the world. No matter the star. We are one. No matter the pain. No matter the darkness. No matter the loss. No matter the fear. We are one. Here, gathered together in common cause, we agree to recognise this singular truth and this singular rule: that we must be kind to one another. Because, each voice enriches us and ennobles us and each voice lost diminishes us. We are the voice of the Universe, the soul of creation, the fire that will light the way to a better future. We are one." ~G'kar

  12. #92
    Consul The Blazin1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Murica... **** yeah
    Posts
    6,847

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rokchick View Post
    Nope, I think you misread the headlines. You saw 9 shot and thought 9 dead.
    http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting
    Specific googling of recent "9 dead ohio" comes up with 7 hits on the 9 wounded at the top.
    So it doesn't count?
    Quote Originally Posted by Baron D'Holbach View Post
    You should quote yourself. It's like liking your Facebook status or high-fiving yourself in the mirror.

    It's what I would do if I didn't have to keep mine exactly how it is for madsquirrels and erazer.

  13. #93
    Philosopher н-υ-п-т-ε-я's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    in my body of course
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Burninator View Post
    Damn. So I suppose the road to banning guns would be more constitutionally fraught than I suspected.
    It all depends on the policy makers, and probably gun manufacturers and their interests.

    Any amendment can be theoretically repelled by another, no problem!

    Quote Originally Posted by wiki
    The Eighteenth Amendment (Amendment XVIII) of the United States Constitution effectively established the prohibition of alcoholic beverages in the United States by declaring the production, transport, and sale of alcohol (though not the consumption or private possession) illegal.
    Quote Originally Posted by wiki
    The Twenty-first Amendment (Amendment XXI) to the United States Constitution repealed the Eighteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which had mandated nationwide Prohibition on alcohol on January 16, 1919. The Twenty-first Amendment was ratified on December 5, 1933. It is unique among the 27 amendments of the U.S. Constitution for being the only one to repeal a prior amendment and to have been ratified by state ratifying conventions.
    http://static.pokemoninfinity.com/im..._forum_sig.png

    trooper? recruit an army and get two recruits from me for your army...

    teacher?
    first five would receive 50 extra coins don't miss the chance...

  14. #94
    Consul Rokchick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    -32 degrees latitude, free, safe and warm
    Posts
    8,824

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Blazin1 View Post
    So it doesn't count?
    Count for what? As an example of why you should BAN GUNS (I mean restrict ownership of course, but playing to the crowd there)? Of course it counts. Every single shooting counts. All tens of thousands of them every year. Even the ones that don't play to your prejudices count. All of them.
    I'm glad I'm not judgemental like all you smug, superficial idiots

  15. #95
    Philosopher cofc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Back to Oz.
    Posts
    4,569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rokchick View Post
    As an example of why you should BAN GUNS
    I see.

  16. #96
    Philosopher н-υ-п-т-ε-я's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    in my body of course
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cofc View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Rokchick View Post
    As an example of why you should BANG GUNS
    I see.
    Fixed
    http://static.pokemoninfinity.com/im..._forum_sig.png

    trooper? recruit an army and get two recruits from me for your army...

    teacher?
    first five would receive 50 extra coins don't miss the chance...

  17. #97
    Consul Sirveri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    6,330

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Burninator View Post
    Damn. So I suppose the road to banning guns would be more constitutionally fraught than I suspected.

    I'm surprised that no one has challenged NJ's laws, then. I suspect that there's still a backdoor way to do this, such as what my state does -- namely requires a license to own a gun, then restricts the ways to get at that license as much as possible, then regulates dozens of little things to make gun ownership awful. It's sort of what red states do with abortion but with gun ownership instead.

    But yeah, I don't read cofc's posts mostly because I generally want to learn things when I read, not intentionally kill brain cells. So I missed that .
    So, it's quite a complicated subject actually, basically the courts gave states leeway to regulate but not to outright ban. Which has turned the entire situation into a lawyer fight as the NRA challenges everything in court saying it is too close to the ban line. That said, none of this really matters, the issue needs to be decided at the federal level, because otherwise people will simply purchase in lax states and drag those firearms across state lines, which was an issue in NYC with guns coming up from Virginia. In the current political climate nothing will ever change. If the democrats were smart they would target the gun manufacturers support of the NRA by threatening their military supply orders and their foreign military aid orders. But Democrats are either the stupidest morons alive, or they're complicit. I'm leaning towards the latter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Joshyyy View Post
    There is some serious misquoting potential above.
    The rep system should be abolished.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •