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
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Can you guess what all this talk, talk, talk about gun control is doing? [View all]Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)76. Then how about some more links? I'll even exerpt them for you.
First up. http://voices.yahoo.com/on-warren-e-burgers-right-bear-arms-256514.html
He declares that the founding fathers implied that this right was a necessity because the people required a militia, or "state army.".......He compares owning guns to owning automobiles and motorboats, both of which are heavily regulated by the state.
But that's not main stream right? OK, how about this. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/supcourt/stories/courtguns051095.htm
When the Supreme Court has spoken in this area and it has done so infrequently it has begun with the idea that the Second Amendment protects a state's right to keep arms for a militia. In a nationally watched 1983 case, the justices let the town of Morton Grove, Ill., ban handguns. Without comment or dissent, they left intact a lower court decision rejecting the contention that Americans have a constitutional right to be armed.
But wait, the Supreme Court said there was no precident in the matter right?
http://www.guncite.com/burger.html
Americans should ask themselves a few questions. The Constitution does not mention automobiles or motorboats, but the right to keep and own an automobile is beyond question; equally beyond question is the power of the state to regulate the purchase or the transfer of such a vehicle and the right to license the vehicle and the driver with reasonable standards. In some places, even a bicycle must be registered, as must some household dogs.
So Chief Justice Burger didn't say fraud. However, he did say that the individual right was a not the Court's view. He should know, he was the Chief Justice when they refused to hear the appeal of the Morton Grove banning of firearms case. Yet, there was no case law right? So go on back, fondle your M-16, and pretend that it has always been this way, that you have an individual right to be armed to the teeth. In the meantime, the rest of us will be busy tring to bring some sanity to the world.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
117 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Can you guess what all this talk, talk, talk about gun control is doing? [View all]
99th_Monkey
Dec 2012
OP
Yep, who are we to deny these yahoos a chance to own an (or another) assault weapon?
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#2
Ah, Hoyt. You keep the vacuum tubes of prohibition glowing orange, long into the night
Eleanors38
Dec 2012
#8
Happy New Year to all those so steeped in guns their user name is a reference to lethal weapons.
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#10
Well, blame it on Eleanor. Hear-tell Franklin only had a .32 by his side of the bed.
Eleanors38
Dec 2012
#21
Near as I can tell, the gun nuts envision a world where we all look like this
99th_Monkey
Dec 2012
#4
Yep, here are some fine folks from the Michigan Militia, confederate flags and all.
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#11
I agree. The deeper you get into the gun culture, the more disgusting this whole thing becomes.
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#16
Except I think they figure their guns will put them in control, and they can take whatever
Hoyt
Dec 2012
#33
I was looking to buy a particular rifle for $1600 4 weeks ago and waffled...
OneTenthofOnePercent
Dec 2012
#7
LBJ's programs make the present Democratic Party look center-right. And all I got was this stinking
Eleanors38
Dec 2012
#22
And that's why you have to not only ban new arms, but ban possession. Let the suckers
jmg257
Dec 2012
#31
I didn't see it that way. Figuring they realize they could eventually face those guns they ignore.
jmg257
Jan 2013
#57
Not "all" - which of course is THE problem, hard to know who will be and who won't be...
jmg257
Jan 2013
#69
In the long run? yep. Don't think resistance would be that steadfast if a few examples were made.
jmg257
Jan 2013
#106
See #50 et. al. The risks must not be high enough, the public interest not serious enough. nt
jmg257
Jan 2013
#109
I don't disagree with any amendments. Just figure their 'restrictions, no matter
jmg257
Jan 2013
#47
There are quite a few links to that quote, all of which refer to an interview on PBS.
jmg257
Jan 2013
#72
None of that changes the fact that the "SCOTUS" NEVER "felt it was a collective right."
AnotherMcIntosh
Jan 2013
#77
Though apparently - he did. Apparently there are transcripts (and DVDs) of him doing so.
jmg257
Jan 2013
#89
more and more people to engage in a collective discussion which impacts our nation and our culture
LanternWaste
Jan 2013
#71
The Newtown massacre was the best ad campaign for AR-15s since, well, ever.
Electric Monk
Jan 2013
#115