|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22452637 - 10/30/15 08:00 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/01/26/1500431/for-the-sixth-time-in-one-week-man-shot-at-gun-show/
that guy must have been a real asshole to get shot 6 times in a week, you'd think he would be smart enough not to be a dick at gunshows after about the third time he was shot
BTW, that article links to a twitter account that links to this
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/errors/404/
is twitter your news source?
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
Quote:
By a lower court, or is your ignorance of the court system in this country equal to your ignorance on firearms?
Have some self respect.
Yeah. Lower courts set case law 98.5% of the time. The Supreme Court only takes 150 cases a year.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22452702 - 10/30/15 08:35 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
By a lower court, or is your ignorance of the court system in this country equal to your ignorance on firearms?
Have some self respect.
Yeah. Lower courts set case law 98.5% of the time. The Supreme Court only takes 150 cases a year.
lower courts upholding semiautomatic bans violates the laws established by the supreme courts
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/21/2nd-circuit-upholds-n-y-and-conn-arms-bans-contradicts-heller-mcdonald/
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22452703 - 10/30/15 08:37 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
ohcrapitsnico said:
Quote:
koods said: What? London and Paris are bigger than any American city. London has twice th population of New York.
Lol you are delusional if you think london has twice the population of new york. Which ass did you pull that out of?
The same ass where he considers a 'jury instruction' to be a ruling/decision.
Yes, it is decision. The guy wanted a new trial because the judge gave the jury instructions that his gun was not protected by the second ammendment.The court found that his gun was not protected and his appeal was denied. That is what is called case law. You suck at this
In United States v. Gilbert, 286 Fed. Appx. 383, 2008 WL 2740453 (9th Cir. July 15, 2008), the Ninth Circuit approved a jury instruction that an individual does not have a Second Amendment right to possess a machine gun or a short-barreled rifle. The court explained that under Heller, “individuals still do not have the right to possess machineguns or short-barreled rifles, as Gilbert did . . .” 286 Fed. Appx. at 386.2 The Petitioner argues that the limitations placed on the Second Amendment right to bear arms by the majority opinion in Heller can not square with the Court’s earlier decision in Miller. Whatever merit there is to that argument, however, this Court is bound by the Heller opinion as written. IV. Conclusion For the reasons set forth herein, the Court concludes that Petitioner is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. T
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
By a lower court, or is your ignorance of the court system in this country equal to your ignorance on firearms?
Have some self respect.
Yeah. Lower courts set case law 98.5% of the time. The Supreme Court only takes 150 cases a year.
lower courts upholding semiautomatic bans violates the laws established by the supreme courts
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/10/21/2nd-circuit-upholds-n-y-and-conn-arms-bans-contradicts-heller-mcdonald/
I guess we'll see if the Supreme Court takes up an appeal or not. If Not that decision stands and becomes stare decisis.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22452818 - 10/30/15 09:20 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
ohcrapitsnico said:
Quote:
koods said: What? London and Paris are bigger than any American city. London has twice th population of New York.
Lol you are delusional if you think london has twice the population of new york. Which ass did you pull that out of?
The same ass where he considers a 'jury instruction' to be a ruling/decision.
Yes, it is decision. The guy wanted a new trial because the judge gave the jury instructions that his gun was not protected by the second ammendment.The court found that his gun was not protected and his appeal was denied. That is what is called case law. You suck at this
In United States v. Gilbert, 286 Fed. Appx. 383, 2008 WL 2740453 (9th Cir. July 15, 2008), the Ninth Circuit approved a jury instruction that an individual does not have a Second Amendment right to possess a machine gun or a short-barreled rifle. The court explained that under Heller, “individuals still do not have the right to possess machineguns or short-barreled rifles, as Gilbert did . . .” 286 Fed. Appx. at 386.2 The Petitioner argues that the limitations placed on the Second Amendment right to bear arms by the majority opinion in Heller can not square with the Court’s earlier decision in Miller. Whatever merit there is to that argument, however, this Court is bound by the Heller opinion as written. IV. Conclusion For the reasons set forth herein, the Court concludes that Petitioner is not entitled to relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. T

"jury instruction" = "decision". 
It's good you're not a lawyer.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
You clearly didn't read the opinion.
It's obvious you aren't a lawyer
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (10/30/15 09:28 AM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22452857 - 10/30/15 09:32 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: You clearly didn't read the opinion.
It's obvious you aren't a lawyer
you're still trying to push jury instruction as a ruling, why not post up the 'opinion' and the case you're referring to
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
I did.
I posted the entire decision on a previous page, and the relevant section appears twice on this page.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
Edited by koods (10/30/15 09:38 AM)
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22452878 - 10/30/15 09:42 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
I see a link to a new york times article an a short snippet, I dont know what previous page you're talking about
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22452986 - 10/30/15 10:17 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: I did.
I posted the entire decision on a previous page, and the relevant section appears twice on this page.
Repeating your claim does not make it so. A jury instruction is not a ruling/decision.
How can you not be ashamed to even say it is?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
The petitioner said that the judge was wrong telling the jury that his gun was not protected by the second ammendment. The appeals court found that his gun was in fact not protected. It doesn't get much more clear than that.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22453024 - 10/30/15 10:30 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
To a guy that can't grasp the term "jury instruction? Perhaps, especially when that same guy thinks London has twice the population of NYC.
Man up. Admit you said something ludicrous. Or, keep building your rep for spouting bullshit that's easily and demonstrably false.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
There's no point in arguing this with you. The appeal was based on the jury instruction. Was the judge right saying that the defendants gun was not protected by the second ammendment. Te appeal court examined this question.
You are being intentionally obtuse. I really don't think you are actually so dumb to be stuck on the jury instruction part.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22453051 - 10/30/15 10:39 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
In a link you provided as 'proof'
Quote:
In United States v. Gilbert, 286 Fed. Appx. 383, 2008 WL 2740453 (9th Cir. July 15, 2008), the Ninth Circuit approved a jury instruction that an individual does not have a Second Amendment right to possess a machine gun or a short-barreled rifle. The court explained that under Heller, "individuals still do not have the right to possess machineguns or short-barreled rifles, as Gilbert did ..." The Petitioner argues that the limitations placed on the Second Amendment right to bear arms by the majority opinion in Heller can not square with the Court's earlier decision in Miller. Whatever merit there is to that argument, however, this Court is bound by the Heller opinion as written.

Clearly, 'obtuse' is another word you have an incorrect understanding of. How sad for you.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,059
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 54 minutes, 39 seconds
|
|
You are not serious person.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22453071 - 10/30/15 10:44 AM (8 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quite serious. I have something else going on as well, I have a working knowledge of words and their meanings.
Something you appear to lack.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22455753 - 10/30/15 09:54 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: http://volokh.com/files/hamblen.pdf
unregisterd machine guns... that seems to be a very important detail that's being left out just as in 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 shows that civilians can legally own machine guns. this ruling certainly dosent say that civilian cannot own machine guns, it says you have to abide by the law regarding ownership and transfer of ownership of NFA weapons and that brightspark is why you see so many youtube videos of people with machine guns, because they are in fact legal to own
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/922
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: The 2nd ammendment [Re: koods]
#22455771 - 10/30/15 09:58 PM (8 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said: There's no point in arguing this with you. The appeal was based on the jury instruction. Was the judge right saying that the defendants gun was not protected by the second ammendment. Te appeal court examined this question.
You are being intentionally obtuse. I really don't think you are actually so dumb to be stuck on the jury instruction part.
they were not registered as is the law regarding machine guns, thus he owned them illegally, it's like when a felon has a firearm, he does not own it legally and thus he is in violation of the laws
is it that you cannot read or you want to twist things to suit an agenda
|
|