spec4 e4 Posted November 29, 2007 Report Share Posted November 29, 2007 In Ma., there is an bill that some people up ther trying to pass an law that you can not spank your kids. What an joke. What is this nation coming to. I might get in trouble for this, but we're going to hell in an hand basket. What right does one group of people telling another group of people what they can and can not do or what they can and can not have? If you don't want to spank you kid that fine, why force your views on the rest of us. And guns, you don't like them, why tell me what I can and can not own? Last time I check, This is the land of the Free. spec.4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiris Posted November 29, 2007 Report Share Posted November 29, 2007 Last time I check, This is the land of the Free. You had better check again. There will be a concerted effort to remove your gun rights too if the liberal left gets into total power in the next election. Why do you think that we cannot get immigration bills passsed? We have a huge responsibility to vote these bustards out. Spiris Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FC Posted November 30, 2007 Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 I'm glad to see the parents protesting this nonsense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brenden Posted November 30, 2007 Report Share Posted November 30, 2007 i agree with spiris on this, vote em out, we all can have an impact on what goes on and who's in power, its up to us! this isn't the land of the free, everything you have you never own, everything you make the damn gov. takes half. (just to provide me with the social security that i'll never have) Just like w/the gay marriage, why give them the same rights as us straight people, we've worked hard to have what we got. i know what god thinks of this and i quote (sorta)....if a man is caught laying with another man, both have done what is destable, and both will die, or heads be on a platter? (i paraphrase cuz i can't remember the verse or exact wording) just wtf is this place, really? spec4 e4, this is hell in a hand basket. The admements are just a sheet of ###### paper for these ass holes that try to take everything thing from us, its their way or no way, screw what our right minded fore fathers wrote for this world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spec4 e4 Posted December 3, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 I also found out by XM Radio(Gun Talk) that the high court is taking an right to bear arms case next years, this will set it for the future cases. Go to Original Supreme Court to Hear DC Gun Ban Case By Ariane de Vogue and Dennis Powell ABC News Tuesday 20 November 2007 Case set to be the first Second Amendment issue before the Court in 70 years. In a decision that could affect gun control laws across the nation, the Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to carry a gun. It has been 70 years since the high court has focused on the meaning of the words "right to keep and bear arms" in the Second Amendment and the case is sure to ignite cultural battles across the country. The Supreme Court agreed to step in because the issue has caused a deep split in the lower courts. While a majority of courts have said that the right to bear arms refers in connection to service in a state militia, two federal courts have said the amendment protects an individual's right to keep a gun. One of those courts, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, went as far as striking down a decades-long ban on the private ownership of handguns in the District of Columbia. It is this case the court has agreed to consider. D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty brought the case to the Supreme Court in an effort to save the district's gun ban -- one of the strictest in the nation -- that went into effect in 1976. Fenty argues, "Whatever right the Second Amendment guarantees, it does not require the district to stand by while its citizens die." The mayor is concerned that if the gun ban is overturned, there will be even more handguns available in the streets. "The District of Columbia has too many handguns," Fenty said. In court papers his lawyers argue, "Handguns are the weapon most likely to be used in a street crime. Although only a third of the nation's firearms are handguns, they are responsible for far more killings, woundings and crimes than all other types of firearms combined." The law banned residents from owning a handgun unless they already had a permit. D.C. residents like Shelly Parker sued the city saying she had a constitutional right to protect herself. Parker said she wants a gun because "it acts as a deterrent to the criminals to me." On March 9, 2007, the U.S. Court of Appeals for D.C. ruled in favor of the residents. In a 2-1 ruling, the appeals court said the Constitution's Second Amendment protects a person's right to own a gun (see Federal Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban). The district will argue that the Second Amendment does not prevent the city from enacting reasonable regulations to limit gun possessions in order to protect residents. The petition raises one question: "whether the Second Amendment forbids the District of Columbia from banning private possession of handguns while allowing possession of rifles and shotguns." Lawyers for the district say that question could allow the justices to narrowly decide the case by saying D.C. law already gives residents the ability to protect themselves with other types of weapons. The mayor and D.C. Attorney General Linda Singer believe the gun ban will stay in place. "We would not have filed this with the Supreme Court if we did not think we would win," Singer told ABC News. But lawyers opposing the gun ban argue in court papers that the city's efforts to fight crime are falling short. They write, "The city consistently fights to secure its right to stand by while its citizens are victimized by crime." Gun control advocates worry that the court's action will embolden gun rights advocates. Dennis A. Henigan of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun violence argues, "The whole purpose of the litigation is to achieve a Supreme Court precedent that they will use to attack many other laws." Henigan said, "This will inspire years and years of litigation and undercut the network of gun laws." The case should be heard early next year. For now, the D.C. gun ban stays in effect. ------- Jump to today's Truthout Features: Today's Truthout Features -------------- New Poll Shows Obama Leading Iowa Shots Fired From Convoy Set an Iraqi Mob to Action Ted Kennedy Jr.'s Firm Sues Over Political Intel Hate Crimes Rose Eight Percent in 2006 Bad Reviews Pile Up for FCC Chief's Plan Michael Winship | "A Plank in Reason, Broke" Europeans, Let Us Prevent the War Against Iran Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann | Losing Afghanistan Democrats Face Uphill Battle in Rolling Back Spy Powers Army Dismissals for Mental Health, Misconduct Rise When AWOL Is the Only Escape - a Patriot's Story Controversial US Attorney Gets New Post Paul Krugman | Republicans and Race Bob Herbert | A Swarm of Swindlers US Plans Case Against AP Photographer in Iraq Kelpie Wilson | Give Thanks for Oil - and OPEC Supreme Court to Hear DC Gun Ban Case Baghdad Bonanza -------------- t r u t h o u t Home (In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. t r u t h o u t has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is t r u t h o u t endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) "Go to Original" links are provided as a convenience to our readers and allow for verification of authenticity. However, as originating pages are often updated by their originating host sites, the versions posted on TO may not match the versions our readers view when clicking the "Go to Original" links. spec.4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fritz Posted December 4, 2007 Report Share Posted December 4, 2007 "Supreme Court to Hear DC Gun Ban Case By Ariane de Vogue and Dennis Powell ABC News Tuesday 20 November 2007 Case set to be the first Second Amendment issue before the Court in 70 years. In a decision that could affect gun control laws across the nation, the Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to carry a gun. " It will probably uphold the right of DC to ban guns, but what makes you so sure it will over- rule other states? As I read it, it says "Supreme Court to Hear DC Gun Ban Case". This is not the end of it. This country is made up of 50 different states (and that is why we still have the electorate college to decide the winner of a national election). Remember that the candidate that gets the most votes (in a national election) is not automatically the winner. I believe you will recall a few elections where that held true. fritz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.