Home | Community | Message Board


Azarius
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Amazon Shop for: Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]
Anonymous

totally out of line
    #2244734 - 01/15/04 07:29 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

"Court upholds District of Columbia gun law prohibiting handguns
Thursday, January 15, 2004 Posted: 10:16 AM EST

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge on Wednesday upheld the District of Columbia's gun control law that prohibits ownership of handguns, rejecting a legal challenge by a group of citizens backed by the National Rifle Association.

U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton dismissed the lawsuit in which the plaintiffs argued that the 28-year-old law violated their Second Amendment right to own guns. The D.C. law prohibits ownership or possession of handguns and requires that others, such as shotguns, be kept unloaded, disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Walton ruled that the Second Amendment is not a broad-based right of gun ownership.

"The Second Amendment does not confer an individual a right to possess firearms. Rather, the Amendment's objective is to ensure the vitality of state militias," Walton wrote.

He went on to say that the amendment was designed to protect the citizens against a potentially oppressive federal government.

He also ruled that the Second Amendment does not apply to the district because it was intended to protect state citizens, and the district is not a state.

A gun control advocate welcomed the ruling.

"It's a big victory for those who overwhelmingly believe that we need fewer guns on our streets, not more," said Matt Nosanchuk, a spokesman for the Violence Policy Center.

Andrew Arulanandam, an NRA spokesman, said the group's lawyers had not seen the ruling on Wednesday night but noted that other courts have taken the opposite opinion."
http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/15/gun.law.ap/index.html

(emphasis mine)  :nonono:

i guess people living in DC will just have to put up with living in the city with the highest murder rate in the country (with 1.5 violent crimes per 100 residents per year), while constitutional "interpretation" by an incompetant judge prevents them from defending themselves. i'm glad i don't live there.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnarkhos
Without a Ruler
Registered: 01/13/04
Posts: 47
Last seen: 8 years, 1 month
Re: totally out of line [Re: ]
    #2244797 - 01/15/04 09:33 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Interesting. I wonder, how does DC's crime rate compare to cities that have right to carry laws?


--------------------
No masters, no servants.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlined33p
Welcome to Violence

Registered: 07/12/03
Posts: 5,381
Loc: the shores of Tripoli
Last seen: 3 years, 6 months
Re: totally out of line [Re: ]
    #2244823 - 01/15/04 09:51 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Wastington, DC really isnt the worst place the us. In Gary, IN the murder rate is nearly double that of washington. Also the violent crime rate in Miami is 2.1 per 100 which is not even the highest. I do believe gun control does influnce the crime rate in an area but the type of inhabitants does have more of an effect.

Although i would say that the constitutional "interpretation" by this incompetant judge certainly does not help with the crime in DC.


--------------------
I'm a nihilist. Lets be friends.

bang bang


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnarkhos
Without a Ruler
Registered: 01/13/04
Posts: 47
Last seen: 8 years, 1 month
Re: totally out of line [Re: d33p]
    #2244861 - 01/15/04 10:10 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

d33p said:
...the type of inhabitants does have more of an effect.



You hit the nail square on the head. The propensity for criminal behavior rests in the character of people, not in the tools at their disposal, neither does it rest in their economic situation. No direct correlation can be found between gun ownership and criminality, nor between poverty and criminality.


--------------------
No masters, no servants.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: totally out of line [Re: Anarkhos]
    #2245057 - 01/15/04 11:17 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Anarkhos said:
Quote:

d33p said:
...the type of inhabitants does have more of an effect.



You hit the nail square on the head. The propensity for criminal behavior rests in the character of people, not in the tools at their disposal, neither does it rest in their economic situation. No direct correlation can be found between gun ownership and criminality, nor between poverty and criminality.



But what influences the character of the people? Certainly everyone is an individual, but if a city has more violent criminals, there must be a reason. Poverty alone may not cause criminality, but I think perhaps standards of living and economic inequality can be major factors.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineAnarkhos
Without a Ruler
Registered: 01/13/04
Posts: 47
Last seen: 8 years, 1 month
Re: totally out of line [Re: silversoul7]
    #2245128 - 01/15/04 11:41 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

In a city as large as DC, I'm sure there are people who have never stolen a dime from anyone, while there are others who would murder their own mothers. Why do some living in identical circumstances, act as angels while others act as demons? Character is displayed in how we react to our circumstances. A sign of maturity is when an individual begins to take responsibility for his actions and the consequences of his actions (actions which are within his control) instead of laying blame on circumstances. Circumstances DO NOT determine behavior as is evidenced by the great diversity of individual human behaviors under virtually identical circumstances.


--------------------
No masters, no servants.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: totally out of line [Re: ]
    #2245302 - 01/16/04 02:21 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

"The Second Amendment does not confer an individual a right to possess firearms. Rather, the Amendment's objective is to ensure the vitality of state militias," Walton wrote.

What else can you expect? That's precisely what the second amendment is.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblekaiowas
mndfrayze'speppet urme
 User Gallery

Registered: 07/14/03
Posts: 5,498
Loc: oz
Re: totally out of line [Re: Xlea321]
    #2245384 - 01/16/04 03:05 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

right to bare arms!!!!!!!

anyway guess what? I see most people who have guns that use them regularly are illegal to begin with. so law isn't really gonna help much there.


--------------------
Annnnnnd I had a light saber and my friend was there and I said "you look like an indian" and he said "you look like satan" and he found a stick and a rock and he named the rock ooga booga and he named the stick Stick and we both thought that was pretty funny. We got eaten alive by mosquitos but didn't notice til the next day. I stepped on some glass while wading in the swamp and cut my foot open, didn't bother me til the next day either....yeah it was a good time, ended the night by buying some liquor for minors and drinking nips and going to he diner and eating chicken fingers, and then I went home and went to bed.---senior doobie


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: totally out of line [Re: Anarkhos]
    #2245403 - 01/16/04 03:15 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Circumstances DO NOT determine behavior as is evidenced by the great diversity of individual human behaviors under virtually identical circumstances.



As a Sociology major I must disagree, as that statement is contrary to everything those in my field of study have found. We are the product of our experiences. NOBODY grows up under identical circumstances. We all live in different households with different incomes, different parents, different circles of friends, exposed to different media, etc. Genetics may play a part in personality as may other factors, but free will(if it does actually exist) plays little, if any role in who we are, at least when you look at society on a larger scale. No place has a high violent crime rate purely by accident. There are factors which lead people down the path of criminal behavior.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineMetaShroom
菌类
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/02/02
Posts: 1,462
Loc: East Anglia UK
Last seen: 9 years, 5 months
Re: totally out of line [Re: kaiowas]
    #2245424 - 01/16/04 03:28 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

kaiowas said:
right to bare arms!!!!!!!





When that was written the 'right to bare arms' meant the right to join an army.


--------------------
:sleepingcow:  :penguinmonkey: :blah:

JOIN MAPS -> www.MAPS.ORG


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: totally out of line [Re: Xlea321]
    #2245504 - 01/16/04 05:33 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Bullshit.

This has been demonstrated many times to you. If you choose not to believe the evidence, it's only because you do not wish to.


--------------------
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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: totally out of line [Re: MetaShroom]
    #2245514 - 01/16/04 05:36 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

I'd say more study on this would be good 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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: totally out of line [Re: Xlea321]
    #2245628 - 01/16/04 08:35 AM (12 years, 10 months ago)

What else can you expect? That's precisely what the second amendment is.

i think i did a pretty good job of demonstrating otherwise in this thread. at least, no one objected to what was said, including you. did you miss that or something?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: totally out of line [Re: ]
    #2245834 - 01/16/04 12:00 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

including you. did you miss that or something?

It's not me you need to impress mush, it's district judges who've been studying the law their entire lives and have clearly reached completely different conclusions about this than you.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: totally out of line [Re: Xlea321]
    #2245952 - 01/16/04 01:08 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

not every decision handed down by a judge is a good one. this was not. the second amendment affirms the right of the people to keep and bear arms. this is a fact. it is explicitly stated in the actual text.

do you think that the second amendment affirms the right of citizens to arm themselves? why or why not?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: totally out of line [Re: ]
    #2246202 - 01/16/04 03:29 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

...Disgusting.... I would never live in D.C.

Gun control advocates quite possibly could cause the death of the 2nd
amendment.

The only way you will get my gun is by prying it from my cold dead
hands.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: totally out of line [Re: ]
    #2246412 - 01/16/04 05:00 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

the second amendment affirms the right of the people to keep and bear arms. this is a fact.

Sorry mush, but it isn't a fact. It's your opinion. It seems an awful lot of legal experts don't share it.

it is explicitly stated in the actual text.

It isn't. It explicitly refers to a state militia. Were the founding fathers really so dim they couldn't simply state "Every citizen has the right to own a gun"?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: totally out of line [Re: Xlea321]
    #2246435 - 01/16/04 05:05 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Bullshit again. Every able bodied man was considered to be part of the militia. The evidence has been provided in the form of quotes from the founders.

You just don't like it.


--------------------
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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: totally out of line [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2246448 - 01/16/04 05:08 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

The evidence has been provided in the form of quotes from the founders.

Horseshit. Quotes from the founders are utterly irrelevant, it's what the amendment says that counts.

You just don't like it.

I'm not making the judgements luv, just telling you what the judges say.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 33,778
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: totally out of line [Re: Xlea321]
    #2246454 - 01/16/04 05:10 PM (12 years, 10 months ago)

Here ya go PinocchiALPO.... choke on them.

Quotes from the Founding Fathers and Their Contemporaries


Introduction
A pinch of wisdom from the Founders with a dash of commentary.



A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises, I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. Games played with the ball, and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be your constant companion of your walks.
--- Thomas Jefferson to Peter Carr, 1785. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.
One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them.
--- Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, 1796. The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, (Memorial Edition) Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.
We established however some, although not all its [self-government] important principles . The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, in all cases to which they think themselves competent, (as in electing their functionaries executive and legislative, and deciding by a jury of themselves, in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed;
---Thomas Jefferson to John Cartwright, 1824. Memorial Edition 16:45, Lipscomb and Bergh, editors.
No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
---Thomas Jefferson: Draft Virginia Constitution, 1776.
The thoughtful reader may wonder, why wasn't Jefferson's proposal of "No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms" adopted by the Virginia legislature? Click here to learn why.
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
---Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
To model our political system upon speculations of lasting tranquility, is to calculate on the weaker springs of the human character.
---Alexander Hamilton
Quotes from the Founders During the Ratification Period of the Constitution
[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.
---James Madison,The Federalist Papers, No. 46.
To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.
---John Adams, A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
John Adams recognizes the fundamental right of citizens, as individuals, to defend themselves with arms, however he states militias must be controlled by government and the rule of law. To have otherwise is to invite anarchy.

The material and commentary that follows is excerpted from Halbrook, Stephen P. "The Right of the People or the Power of the State Bearing Arms, Arming Militias, and the Second Amendment". Originally published as 26 Val. U. L.Rev. 131-207, 1991.

Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.
---Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
---Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
During the Massachusetts ratifying convention William Symmes warned that the new government at some point "shall be too firmly fixed in the saddle to be overthrown by anything but a general insurrection." Yet fears of standing armies were groundless, affirmed Theodore Sedwick, who queried, "if raised, whether they could subdue a nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?"
[W]hereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.
---Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
The Virginia ratifying convention met from June 2 through June 26, 1788. Edmund Pendleton, opponent of a bill of rights, weakly argued that abuse of power could be remedied by recalling the delegated powers in a convention. Patrick Henry shot back that the power to resist oppression rests upon the right to possess arms:
Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.
Henry sneered,
O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone...Did you ever read of any revolution in a nation...inflicted by those who had no power at all?
More quotes from the Virginia convention:
[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually...I ask, who are the militia? They consist of now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor...
---George Mason
Zacharia Johnson argued that the new Constitution could never result in religious persecution or other oppression because:
[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.
The Virginia delegation's recommended bill of rights included the following:
That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and therefore ought to be avoided as far as the circumstances and protection of the community will admit; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
The following quote is from Halbrook, Stephen P., That Every Man Be Armed: The Evolution of a Constitutional Right, University of New Mexico Press, 1984.
The whole of that Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals...[I]t establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of.
---Albert Gallatin to Alexander Addison, Oct 7, 1789, MS. in N.Y. Hist. Soc.-A.G. Papers, 2.


--------------------
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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop for: Scales

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* what is the militia?
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 1,761 32 11/13/04 12:03 AM
by retread
* Lousiana Democratic Rep. William Jefferson [Representative A] Under Investigation DiploidM 1,086 10 05/24/06 12:59 PM
by gregorio
* For You Gun Haters
( 1 2 3 4 ... 10 11 all )
Sinistar 9,939 211 02/09/03 07:18 AM
by Evolving
* Jefferson's 11th Ammendment FrankieJustTrypt 1,274 9 02/19/04 10:50 PM
by FrankieJustTrypt
* The feds say I'm a militia member. Ellis Dee 495 2 11/23/02 12:47 PM
by BowlKiller
* Even Jefferson violated the Constitution silversoul7 371 3 09/03/04 12:59 PM
by DoctorJ
* Arab janjaweed militia burning africans alive question_for_joo 967 13 07/29/04 04:51 AM
by wrong
* Thomas Jefferson
cb9fl
252 1 05/10/05 11:50 PM
by Silversoul

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
3,290 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Gaiana.nl
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.116 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 17 queries.