In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Cynical...Okay ?
Highball
Member Posts: 15,755
Cynical ..that describes me to a `t'. I have witnessed for 45 years ..more ..as courts, media, government, and big business have conspired to limit, restrict, and erase freedom from citizens here in America.
The recent Supreme Court case concerning firearms leaves me with a cold feeling..a feeling that there is a very ugly surprise awaiting those of us that value freedom.
I wait patiently for events to unravel concerning this decision.
I can tell you folks this.
Where it to develop that I am wrong in my assessment of the harm I believe this decision will do ..if it becomes a landslide of gun rights being restored here in America ..REAL gun Rights.not the crap they CALL gun Rights.
I will stand right here on this forum and admit that I was wrong. Eating crow isn't always bad ..especially in a case like this.
I will leave you with this thought.
Bush had his justice dept. put out a position paper stating that the Second Amendment was an individual Right.
Within one sentence he then stated that `We are going to step up enforcement of all federal gun laws.."
He then went on the record .."Put a new Assault Weapon ban on my desk.I will sign it".
Sounds about like the Supreme Court decision.
What part of `infringed' is so very hard to understand ?
The recent Supreme Court case concerning firearms leaves me with a cold feeling..a feeling that there is a very ugly surprise awaiting those of us that value freedom.
I wait patiently for events to unravel concerning this decision.
I can tell you folks this.
Where it to develop that I am wrong in my assessment of the harm I believe this decision will do ..if it becomes a landslide of gun rights being restored here in America ..REAL gun Rights.not the crap they CALL gun Rights.
I will stand right here on this forum and admit that I was wrong. Eating crow isn't always bad ..especially in a case like this.
I will leave you with this thought.
Bush had his justice dept. put out a position paper stating that the Second Amendment was an individual Right.
Within one sentence he then stated that `We are going to step up enforcement of all federal gun laws.."
He then went on the record .."Put a new Assault Weapon ban on my desk.I will sign it".
Sounds about like the Supreme Court decision.
What part of `infringed' is so very hard to understand ?
Comments
But I still fail to see how the SCOTUS ruling upholding the 2nd Amendment, and overturning the D.C. gun ban. Which will almost certainly lead to other local gun bans being overturned, is a BAD thing.
What good is a weapon if you can't feed it. You think that won't be NEXT? SCOTUS won't protect ammo, bet on it.
I too am VERY cynical about the decision. I don't lay MY hope to slimy suits.
Once again;
They did NO such thing as 'upholding the BOR".
That phrase so many are orgasmic over.."Individual Right"...is MEANINGLESS when you have to crawl on your bellies to empty suits to exercise it !!
Infringed, man..INFRINGED ????
quote:Although we do not undertake an
exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.
We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those "in common use at the time." 307 U. S., at 179. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of "dangerous and unusual weapons." See 4 Blackstone 148-149 (1769); 3 B. Wilson, Works of the Honourable James Wilson 79 (1804); J. Dunlap, The New-York Justice 8 (1815); C. Humphreys, A Compendium of the Common Law in Force in Kentucky 482 (1822); 1 W. Russell, A Treatise on Crimes and Indictable Misdemeanors 271-272 (1831); H. Stephen, Summary of the Criminal Law 48 (1840); E. Lewis, An Abridgment of the Criminal Law of the United States 64 (1847); F. Wharton, A Treatise on the Criminal Law of the United States 726 (1852). See also State v. Langford, 10 N. C. 381, 383-384 (1824); O'Neill v. State, 16 Ala. 65, 67 (1849); English v. State, 35 Tex. 473, 476 (1871); State v. Lanier, 71 N. C. 288, 289 (1874). It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service-M-16 rifles and the like-may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment's ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and We identify these presumptively lawful regulatory measures only as examples; our list does not purport to be exhaustive.
While they ruled that the 2A is an INDIVIDUAL right and not a collective right (read member of a govt militia), the wording that has hurt us is that "complete or total bans are unconstitutional".
This has opened the door for the gun banners. Look at DC already. They said they will comply with the "letter and spirit" of the SCOTUS ruling. That means they can ban ownership of all semiauto and even revolvers and tell you that you can only have single shot pistols/rifles/shotguns. Guess what...they complied with the SCOTUS by not having a total ban like previously.
Now lets take what DC will most likely do IMHO. They have already started registration. They will let everyone register and then trim down what they will allow in the boundries...easy confiscation of all now prohibited firearms. Then they will do like other cities that require you to get a permit to keep approved firearms in YOUR HOUSE...and if you do not pass their test (yeah they have already said they will have a test) or their warm fuzzy feeling about you, they can deny you a permit to keep the firearm at home. Guess what? Again they are in compliance with the SCOTUS ruling.
The people in power have no plan to ever allow the citizens to keep weapons...our days are numbered. They have been and will continue to take them away step by step. Look at who is voting in our next POTUS...the young and welfare that rely upon the govt to take care of them. These people will give up all freedoms in exchange for a handout from Uncle Sam. They do not see once they have relenquished their right to self defense and the ability to remove an oppressive govt, that they have become servants and slaves and the govt can stop giving them anything...there is nothing they can do about it either.
Cynical ..that describes me to a `t'. I have witnessed for 45 years ..more ..as courts, media, government, and big business have conspired to limit, restrict, and erase freedom from citizens here in America.
The recent Supreme Court case concerning firearms leaves me with a cold feeling..a feeling that there is a very ugly surprise awaiting those of us that value freedom.
I wait patiently for events to unravel concerning this decision.
I can tell you folks this.
Where it to develop that I am wrong in my assessment of the harm I believe this decision will do ..if it becomes a landslide of gun rights being restored here in America ..REAL gun Rights.not the crap they CALL gun Rights.
I will stand right here on this forum and admit that I was wrong. Eating crow isn't always bad ..especially in a case like this.
I will leave you with this thought.
Bush had his justice dept. put out a position paper stating that the Second Amendment was an individual Right.
Within one sentence he then stated that `We are going to step up enforcement of all federal gun laws.."
He then went on the record .."Put a new Assault Weapon ban on my desk.I will sign it".
Sounds about like the Supreme Court decision.
What part of `infringed' is so very hard to understand ?
Bert,
Sadly, history tells me you are not being cynical, but instead you're being logical.
If you are wrong, I too will gladly "eat crow" publicly on this forum, but I fear I won't have to.[V]
25-30 years ago I used to think my dad was the crabbiest old bugger on the planet. Next week I will be 47 years old, and after ten million times of some sumbach pi$$ing down my back and trying to convince me it's raining........well you know....
Anyone can be a cynic, cheap and easy. What takes real discipline is being a stoic.
I'll remain cynical, I'm not a Vulcan. [:D]
Yup..this is true.
HOWEVER...I would so terribly miss the anguished screams of shrill indignation that echo forth when I puncture yet another Beast lover ..generally using their own lance to do it with.
These sad folks just do not understand that their feeble attempts at rebuttal are NEVER aimed at ME, personally.they are shooting at the Founders.
I merely use as a shield the sturdy framework laid out by GIANTS of men.those Founders..I remain mostly untouched by the vicious attacks launched my way.
When you stand upon the Constitution.one holds the high ground.
All the rest are scrabbling about in the effluent left by the Elites and their minions.
I said I was `cynical' ..not superhuman enough to deny myself lifes' simple pleasures.[:D][:D]
To me it is rational thought and nothing more .
Afterall we are dealing with politicians .
If we are rational, we are watchful.
we need more junkyard attack dogs. who else will warn/protect the sheep?
[:D]
Once again I think Highball hit the x-ring. Happy? I would love to be happy. Cynical? I grew that way from life's experience.
25-30 years ago I used to think my dad was the crabbiest old bugger on the planet. Next week I will be 47 years old, and after ten million times of some sumbach pi$$ing down my back and trying to convince me it's raining........well you know....
I too will be 47, on the 5th day of July. Cynical? I am now. As a boy/young man, i thought EVERYONE in the US had at least 1 shotgun, 1 rifle, and 1 handgun in their home.I guess i was wrong.
Now i think most households in the US have at least 1 person that is trying to see the rest of us loose the right to have our guns.[V]
I am afraid you are right.[V]
Instead we must both be vigilant. Such is the burden of Patriots.