Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ancianita

(43,307 posts)
2. Question 1:What do you mean by "much stronger terms." Terms like 'crying fire in a crowded theater"?
Sun Jun 5, 2022, 07:51 AM
Jun 2022

Last edited Sun Jun 5, 2022, 08:38 AM - Edit history (1)

Question 2:
Isn't the infringement argument around "background checks" for 2A usable for the "crying fire" infringment in 1A?

Question 3 re

by we still manage sensible regulation of both of them
:
What do you mean?
I can't see how we sensibly manage 1A by overturning all its precedent support for Roe. At all.

I can't see how we sensibly manage 2A by not overturning all its precedent support in Heller. At all.

So how is overturning the precedents of Roe sensible in shrinking bodily autonomy rights of 51% of the nation, and how is not overturning Heller sensible in expanding 'shall not be infringed' rights to 3% of the nation.

We on DU have already established the SCOTUS bias of overturning precedent for Roe, and not so much the SCOTUS bias of not overturning Heller. Why is that. Who benefits.

For the both of them, maybe you could explain in what way "we" "still manage sensible regulation."
I don't know about anyone else, but I don't count myself in your "we."

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Are we a menaced society?...»Reply #2