ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
Quote:
Originally Posted by patsfan13
The site documents far greater decreases where the gun laws were overturned, facts are facts. Almost double the natl ave IIRC.
Deal with it, the rest is just spin.
The blog is spin as it has an obvious agenda.. the trends are obvious.
__________________ "Being the best doesn't mean you always win. It just means you win more than anyone else".. tweet from Kurt Warner to Tom Brady.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
Quote:
Originally Posted by shirtsleeve
Ahhh, but here you try to blur public domain vs. private domain. You say you own a business. It is your business and your property. You absolutely have the right as the property/business owner to make your own rules within your business. Just like shirts and shoes. (please include sleeves!) Hell, you have every right to ban anyone from wearing hats orcologne or the color purple clothes on your property. Its YOUR property.
Public domain is very different. And here you bring to a concise head why I did not like the HOW of the SCOTUS decision. It steps on state's rights and community rights by incorporating the 14th. If they had used the tenth alone and decided once and finally that the second is a right reserved to the People and the People alone, I would feel differently about the decision.
just fyi, I'm not blurring anything -- I'm posing questions about where people think lines can be drawn.
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicowalker
just fyi, I'm not blurring anything -- I'm posing questions about where people think lines can be drawn.
Ok, no problem. It read kinda funny though. You mentioned your business, property rights, and then the public domain as if they were linked, at least thats how I read it. I'll go back and read it again. I might have read it wrong.
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
Quote:
Originally Posted by shirtsleeve
Ok, no problem. It read kinda funny though. You mentioned your business, property rights, and then the public domain as if they were linked, at least thats how I read it. I'll go back and read it again. I might have read it wrong.
no worries -- I may not have written it clearly. I was asking (or trying to) how people view each of the two -- private property and the public arena -- with regard to guns.
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicowalker
I agree with most of what you say here, RW.
One thing I do struggle with is the question of whether people have any rights to ban handguns in a specified place, and if so, is it solely private property? So, in a very limited example, if I own a business establishment, should I be able to ban guns? I believe so, just as I think the business owner should be able to ban shirtless customers or permit smoking -- but those 2 examples, of course, aren't addressed in the Constitution.
On a wider basis, can any form of community ban guns? Shouldn't people also have the right to live in an area without (legal) guns if they do desire? If so, how wide can the community be, and what kind of majority should be required? Like most restrictions, my own view is that a 51/49 vote doesn't suffice to put in place a restricion on individuals' behavior -- but what if it's 90/10?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shirtsleeve
Ahhh, but here you try to blur public domain vs. private domain. You say you own a business. It is your business and your property. You absolutely have the right as the property/business owner to make your own rules within your business. Just like shirts and shoes. (please include sleeves!) Hell, you have every right to ban anyone from wearing hats orcologne or the color purple clothes on your property. Its YOUR property.
Public domain is very different. And here you bring to a concise head why I did not like the HOW of the SCOTUS decision. It steps on state's rights and community rights by incorporating the 14th. If they had used the tenth alone and decided once and finally that the second is a right reserved to the People and the People alone, I would feel differently about the decision.
Shirtsleeve pretty much summed it up for me. Private versus public is the difference IMO. I'm no constitutional scholar or anything, but I would think in your question, a "community" could be an entire state possibly. For discussions sake, lets say the state of Vermont voted 90/10 to ban weapons. It still wouldn't fly I don't think, because state law cannot usurp constitutional rights. As for privately owned property, I personally agree, but I don't what the legal answer truly is. If I owned a nightclub, I don't think I'd want to allow guns inside.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." Leo Tolstoy, 1897
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
Crime in general is down, but at any rate not many people are opposed anymore to the individual right to own guns. It took some education for some of us to realize that many gun owners are simply ordinary people who are into guns, sort of the way some people are into cars or antiques. I became more sympathetic to gun ownership after reading Truman Capote's In Cold Blood (which I read as an adult), where I came to realize that rural people can truly feel vulnerable without protection.
Where we tend to disagree is that liberals are more supportive than many conservatives when it comes to closing gun show loopholes, conducting background checks, and targeting illegal sales. I think that has had the biggest impact on reducing gun related crime, not the fact that people of guns.
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
People want to believe that because there are more guns there are less crime, but as pointed out previously crime is down across the nation. From our two largest cities, violent crime is significantly down....
-8.4% Decrease in Murder Rates from 2010 to 2011
-13.4 % Decrease in Gang Related Murder Rates from 2010 to 2011
-20.3% Decrease in violent crime from 2010 to 2011
With the same line of reasoning as proposed by the Fox News Article, one could conclude that since Obama has been president violent crime has decreased significantly...
4Likes
Re: Media Silence Is Deafening About Important Gun News
) Hell, you have every right to ban anyone from wearing hats orcologne or the color purple clothes on your property. Its YOUR property.
Linear Mode
