General Discussion

Marengo

(3,477 posts)

106. What case law do you base your opinion on?

Reply to yallerdawg (Reply #104)

Fri Jun 23, 2017, 02:29 PM

Jun 2017

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

111 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

3 people were killed at a UPS today. 13 killed in last 72 hours. WHY do we have [View all] Maraya1969 Jun 2017 OP

Compassion Else You Are Mad Jun 2017 #1

I would say that empathizing with them when all they want to do is destroy us FiveGoodMen Jun 2017 #109

And hundreds get killed in cities like Chicago Not Ruth Jun 2017 #2

You are right. Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #6

There actually was a thread for all the victims of gun violence. It's here somewhere if you look. luvMIdog Jun 2017 #3

I just don't see why their shootings should get any extra anything. And the Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #5

some people are slower to learn. Our society has so many thing to learn we just keep trying and luvMIdog Jun 2017 #7

Thanks for that sane statement. You reminded me of my Buddhist beliefs that I let fly out the Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #8

maybe you just need a good hug today. Here have a ((((((hug)))))) luvMIdog Jun 2017 #10

Thanks. Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #15

But quick to unlearn FiveGoodMen Jun 2017 #11

I'm 60 :D Yes, these are troubled times. We have to keep planting trees, sweeping the kitchen in luvMIdog Jun 2017 #13

I found it and thanks. The link is below Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #9

And a possible active shooter now at Travis Air Force Base. JTFrog Jun 2017 #4

I'm with you. All shootings are tragic, but why does it only matter to the media when rich, white smirkymonkey Jun 2017 #12

Every week a bunch of people get shot in chicago. jmg257 Jun 2017 #20

So you think they are more important than the others smirkymonkey Jun 2017 #21

So did i say anything about one victim being more important? jmg257 Jun 2017 #22

It is about being in powerful positions in government. LeftInTX Jun 2017 #36

I must have missed something Abq_Sarah Jun 2017 #14

We do have what may be called well-regulated militias (Capitol Police?)... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #16

Only if you some serious re-defining. Igel Jun 2017 #19

Irrelevant, since militia membership is not a prerequisite for firearm possession. Marengo Jun 2017 #24

If you totally ignore the first half of the 2nd Amendment - "irrelevant"... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #25

It doesn't exist as an enforceable prerequisite, so...ya, irrelevant. Marengo Jun 2017 #26

It exists. You ignore. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #27

Where today is a US citizen denied the right to possess a firearm unless they are enrolled in... Marengo Jun 2017 #30

Try going to the Capitol with your firearm. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #31

That isn't an answer to what I asked and you know it. Try again. Marengo Jun 2017 #32

If the 'right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed'... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #33

Still not an answer to what I asked. Try again. Marengo Jun 2017 #37

Answered. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #38

Nope, and your diversionary tactic is obvious. Shall I take that as a concession? Marengo Jun 2017 #39

YOUR diversionary tactic is obvious! yallerdawg Jun 2017 #40

Still waiting for an example of where firearm ownership is only permitted to persons enrolled... Marengo Jun 2017 #41

It has already been answered. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #42

Still waiting for you to provide an example of where firearm ownership is only permitted to... Marengo Jun 2017 #43

Your comment ends with "?" yallerdawg Jun 2017 #44

Still waiting for you to provide an example of where firearm ownership is only permitted for persons Marengo Jun 2017 #45

I win when you hit "Twenty!" yallerdawg Jun 2017 #46

STILL waiting for you to provide an example of where firearm ownership is only permitted to persons Marengo Jun 2017 #47

Your question was... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #48

Ahhhh, so it IS a semantics game you are playing to avoid answering the question. Marengo Jun 2017 #49

I answered the question. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #50

No, you did not, and you know this. Otherwise, you would not continue with this absurd effort... Marengo Jun 2017 #51

See, you are just playing a game. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #53

And STILL waiting for you to provide an example of where firearm ownership is only permitted for Marengo Jun 2017 #54

At least we know what is important to you. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #55

Still waiting for you to provide an example of where firearm ownership is only permitted for Marengo Jun 2017 #58

The question was answered YESTERDAY! yallerdawg Jun 2017 #59

In other words, you can't as your position is entirely untenable and your only "out" is a... Marengo Jun 2017 #62

Why are your questions... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #64

Mine, the first in this exchange, remains unanswered. Try again. Marengo Jun 2017 #65

#25. Answered. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #66

At this point, you have answered in a manner. By continuing to duck and dodge long after it has... Marengo Jun 2017 #67

#30. Answered. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #69

LOL! Confirmed, you having nothing to support your position. Marengo Jun 2017 #70

Excuse me? yallerdawg Jun 2017 #71

LOL! Yep, absolutely confirmed, you have NOTHING to back your position. Marengo Jun 2017 #72

# 33. Answered once more. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #73

I have repeatedly stated you have not. Rather than acknowledge this and proceed with... Marengo Jun 2017 #74

Since the question has been answered... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #75

Wow! It's rare to find someone who so vigorously rubs their own nose in their own fail, and publicly Marengo Jun 2017 #78

It's YOUR nose in the fail! yallerdawg Jun 2017 #81

Where has the first half been enforced as a legal prerequisite for the ownership of firearms... Marengo Jun 2017 #82

I get it that you support unconditional gun sales! yallerdawg Jun 2017 #83

If that is the case, at some point of time and somewhere in the United States, militia membership.. Marengo Jun 2017 #84

Where in the second half of the 2nd Amendment... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #86

Still waiting on a link or cite to where I've stated I support "unconditional gun sales". Marengo Jun 2017 #95

Sorry, I'm just consistent. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #96

Your position isn't "consistent" It's nonsensical. Government, Federal and state, can and do impose Marengo Jun 2017 #97

I replied to #80 days ago. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #98

Do you acknowledge that I am not in favor of "unconditional gun sales" as I stated that I am... Marengo Jun 2017 #99

There is your inconsistency. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #100

Heller did not find the right to be unconditional, and acknowledged that as Heller conceded the Marengo Jun 2017 #101

It's your argument, not mine. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #102

What condition does it impose? Marengo Jun 2017 #103

The conditions related to our founding in the late 1700's! yallerdawg Jun 2017 #104

What case law do you base your opinion on? Marengo Jun 2017 #106

I have pointed out repeatedly... yallerdawg Jun 2017 #107

What would be the precedent for a reversal? If the meaning is so clear, how can there be such Marengo Jun 2017 #108

Look at any of the dissenting opinions. yallerdawg Jun 2017 #110

That hunting is not specifically mentioned actually reinforces the individual interpretation... Marengo Jun 2017 #111

I own over a dozen rifles and pistols but am getting sick & tired of people Jim Beard Jun 2017 #77

"NRA membership peddlers." yallerdawg Jun 2017 #79

I agree with you, and junked my NRA membership long ago. I'm an FFL holder, and would like to see... Marengo Jun 2017 #80

Odd? yallerdawg Jun 2017 #85

Thank you. billh58 Jun 2017 #88

I do know that there have been instances in the past where state laws were either proposed ... mr_lebowski Jun 2017 #87

A majority of state constitutions enumerate the right to keep and bear arms to varying degrees... Marengo Jun 2017 #89

"Workin' 9 to 5..." yallerdawg Jun 2017 #90

Hey, where's that link or cite I asked for to back up your claim that I support "unconditional... Marengo Jun 2017 #94

'Collective' right is not at all a 'recent invention', it's the 'individual' that's the recent one mr_lebowski Jun 2017 #92

US v Miller, and the case examined only the issue of whether or not the firearm could be... Marengo Jun 2017 #93

Since BARs were very much used by the military (BTW as were short barreled shotguns), jmg257 Jun 2017 #105

+++++++++++ HAB911 Jun 2017 #57

There you go billh58 Jun 2017 #60

I think you need a nap Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #18

No, but Scalise voted against mental health restrictions on gun ownership Orrex Jun 2017 #76

What you said. Demtexan Jun 2017 #17

+++++++++++ HAB911 Jun 2017 #23

Who was it that said .... Tracer Jun 2017 #28

They are public figures inwiththenew Jun 2017 #29

If you can't muster up sympathy... Joe941 Jun 2017 #34

I find that people who have a need to quietly insert a negative comment about Maraya1969 Jun 2017 #35

I agree 100% amuse bouche Jun 2017 #52

"important" people are more important to some HAB911 Jun 2017 #56

Millions of Democrats and Progressives have guns and support the 2nd Amendment. gilbert sullivan Jun 2017 #61

I'm with you on this one. Scruffy1 Jun 2017 #63

I couldn't agree more. nt FoxNewsSucks Jun 2017 #68

Main stream media decides who matters Alea Jun 2017 #91