Welcome to PatsFans.com

You Liberals Were Right

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Harry Boy, Nov 20, 2007.

  1. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    They're messing with our constitution again, the bastards want your gun but the "poor victim of racism and bigotry gang banger" will keep his.

    We want freedom.

    WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court said Tuesday it will decide whether the District of Columbia can ban handguns, a case that could produce the most in-depth examination of the constitutional right to "keep and bear arms" in nearly 70 years.
    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8T1IL100&show_article=1
     
  2. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,197
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +572 / 6 / -2

    I'd expect the ban to be deemed unconstitutional as it should be. Regulation is fine, but banning is wrong.
     
  3. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    Imagine telling the Wash DC gang bangers they can't carry a gun :singing:
     
  4. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,958
    Likes Received:
    196
    Ratings:
    +424 / 12 / -26

    The constitution usually rules, so expect it to be overturned.
     
  5. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,197
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +572 / 6 / -2

    I'm all for gun control. I think it only makes sense. The only issue I have is that it be sensible, and that any law abiding citizen have their constitutional right to bear arms. Anyone who doesn't do it legally, should be punished to the furthest extent. I don't own a gun, most of my friends and family do own them, I've shot them, and I don't want them. They're dangerous IMO, and where I wouldn't say I'd never own one, I have absolutely no desire or plans too. No thanks. However, that doesn't mean law abiding citizens shouldn't.
     
  6. fleabassist1

    fleabassist1 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,104
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    Let them have their guns... enforce the laws if they are found guilty of a gun crime. If they kill someone, they should be hanged.
     
  7. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,178
    Likes Received:
    199
    Ratings:
    +290 / 11 / -10

    I suppose if we look at gangs and individuals as a well regulated militia, then the DC law would be unconstitutional. Hopefully, though, the SC will not be as ridiculous as the right wing, and will instead evaluate the law in light of current reality. Hand guns should not be outlawed nationwide, but there are areas where it probably makes sense to restrict them in order to reduce crime. One has to believe that forefathers had common sense.
     
  8. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,178
    Likes Received:
    199
    Ratings:
    +290 / 11 / -10

    That's the typical right wing way. Let's not try to stop crime before it happens. Let's simply punish the criminal. A lot of good that does the victim!
     
  9. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    "A well regulated militia..." has to mean something. It has to qualify the rest of the Amendment somehow or it wouldn't be there. Some have argued that the intent of the founders was to prevent the federal government from banning state militias, IE no federal restrictions on the National Guard, and never intended for this to be a restriction on the individual states from having any sort of law they wanted; but its by no means clear. I see this SC being more than willing to ignore those four words at the beginning of my post though. So I'm not really sure what Harry's so concerned about. I see the DC restriction on borrowed time. It doesn't seem to have done a whole lot to reduce crime. So there's not a whole lot to get upset about either way.
     
  10. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    Criminals don't care about laws thats why they're criminals, the Gang Bangers would love to see a Law that would take the "good guys" gun away that would mean the Gang Banger and the Scumsucker that comes through your bedroom window at 3:00 AM won't have to worry about anybody shooting his filthy face off, BUT, he'll have his little gun.

    THE BAD GUYS WANT THIS LAW PUT INTO EFFECT IT MEANS LESS GUNS THAT MIGHT SHOOT THEM.

    FOOLS
    :bricks:
     
  11. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,178
    Likes Received:
    199
    Ratings:
    +290 / 11 / -10

    If the approach was as simplistic as you describe, you'd be right, but actually it's more involved. By outlawing guns, you can then easily arrest suspects just for having guns. The idea is to stop crime before it happens, not the idiotic right-wing way of letting the crime happen (even encouraging it by protecting the criminal's right to have guns) and then punishing the criminal. The liberal idea is to save lives; the neocon idea is to punish cirminals at all costs, even if it means giving them the means to commit crimes. It's the same idiotic idea that neocons had in Iraq. Let's stop the terrorists from coming to the US by giving them Americans to kill in Iraq.
     
  12. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,197
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +572 / 6 / -2

    That makes no sense at all. All you're doing by banning hand guns is eliminating law abiding, legally seaking citizens from having them. A criminal will aquire arms regardless. It's a senseless, stupid, and unconstitutional policy. Again, I'm all for gun control, and sensible regulation, but this law is flat out wrong.
     
  13. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,197
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +572 / 6 / -2

    What crime Patters? At least 6 of my friends have licenses to carry a concealed weapon. At least 15 of my friends and relatives have rifles and shotguns. None of them have every committed a crime, with, or without their guns. By banning them, all you're doing is preventing law abiding citizens from their constitutional right to have them. When a person drives drunk and kills someone, do we ban alchohol altogether?
     
  14. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,197
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +572 / 6 / -2

    We should ban alchohol. Bring back Prohibition. :rolleyes:

    You can put arsewipes who commit crimes with illegal weapons in jail for life if you want. You can actually enforce the 1 year mandatories for carrying an unregistered firearm. The problem, as is the case with virtually everything, is enforcement. We don't need to ban didly, since it's not law abiding, registered owners who are the problem. It's the loser criminals. It's sad to see how quickly some people will piss on constituitonal rights.
     
  15. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    27,197
    Likes Received:
    236
    Ratings:
    +572 / 6 / -2

    BTW, IRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQ!
     
  16. fleabassist1

    fleabassist1 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,104
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    #12 Jersey

    1. If the zany liberals wanted to protect victims so much they would enforce the death penalty. Less gun chargers if people know they will be killed for it. Enforce the guilty by association law and arrest everyone responsible for the shooting. The gun dealer, the shooter, the mobster who ordered the hit...

    ENFORCE THE DAMN LAWS INSTEAD OF GIVING IDIOTS RIGHTS...
     
  17. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    They have all the laws they need right now to deal with "Scum & Guns" they just won't enforce them and if some prosecutor or cop does try to enforce the existing law the bawling blubbering liberal civil liberty rats want the Cop & Prosecutor put in prison.

    Go after that Baggy Pant Jive A$s Gang Banger thats out on the street killing his brothers everynight, it's not the gun the loons should be going after it's the slimey creep that pulls the trigger that should be eliminated.

    Guns Don't Kill People Kill (Savages)

    Bill Cosby For President
     
  18. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    40,351
    Likes Received:
    203
    Ratings:
    +716 / 2 / -9

    Here's how the Massachusetts Moonbats handle criminals, what we need in this country is a Muslim President, Congress, Senate and Supreme Court if we did have a Muslim Govt this guy would have been lashed, his teeth would have been removed along with his feet then he would hve been Stoned To Death and this young women and her husband would still be alive to enjoy tomorrows sunrise.

    Mohammad For President:

    Todays News
    http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/general/view.bg?articleid=1046148
     
    Last edited: Nov 21, 2007
  19. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    18,178
    Likes Received:
    199
    Ratings:
    +290 / 11 / -10

    As I said, in high-crime areas it may make sense to outlaw guns so as to more easily arrest those with guns. It's a way of stopping crime before it happens. While it's true that that approach could result in some innocent law-abiding people being arrested, that would only happen if somehow police became aware they were in possession of a gun. But, where the law serves a purpose is when the police have a suspect, but lack evidence. If the suspect has a gun, s/he can then be arrested.

    Also, I'm all for punishing criminals, but punishing criminals does not stop the crime that has already happened. The goal should be to prevent crime in the first place -- through education, jobs, mental health programs, drug abuse programs, etc. Crime is a reflection of problems in our society. We should correct those problems.

    As far as fleabassist's point about "giving the idiots" rights, in our system of justice, a person is innocent until proven guilty, so you have to give him/her rights.
     
  20. scott c

    scott c On the Game Day Roster

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    411
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    They do arrest outlaws with guns Patters.........but then put them back on the streets later that day............to find another gun.........outlaws dont follow any rules or regulations..........jeez,you just dont get it.......:bricks:
     

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>