Gun Issues and the Current Administration.....

This is a discussion on Gun Issues and the Current Administration..... within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Originally Posted by atctimmy For those of us who think lemmings are birds: Noun lemming (plural lemmings) Any of the small Arctic and Subarctic rodents ...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27
Like Tree21Likes

Thread: Gun Issues and the Current Administration.....

  1. #16
    Distinguished Member Array AZJD1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wichita Falls Tx.
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by atctimmy View Post
    For those of us who think lemmings are birds:

    Noun

    lemming (plural lemmings)

    Any of the small Arctic and Subarctic rodents of the tribe Lemmini. Three genera of vole are also commonly called lemmings.
    I stand corrected, rodent sounds better than birds anyway. Let me change that for you.
    Stop whining and go do something that makes a difference!
    If you think that I may be talking to you, then I am.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member Array tokerblue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    2,334
    Quote Originally Posted by AZJD1968 View Post
    I am basing my posts on the reality that nothing has happened under this administration to take away my guns or my right to own them. And I refuse to buy into the BS that I hear from the media, NRA, ammo companies, and gun companies who have a vested interest in scaring me into following an agenda. I will not tow a party line.
    - Nothing happened because there were 5 pro Second Amendment SC Judges. It wasn't through a lack of trying. I'm not a Republican or Democrat, but I fail to see how this administration has done anything positive for gun owners.

  4. #18
    Distinguished Member Array AZJD1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Wichita Falls Tx.
    Posts
    1,505
    Quote Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post
    - Nothing happened because there were 5 pro Second Amendment SC Judges. It wasn't through a lack of trying. I'm not a Republican or Democrat, but I fail to see how this administration has done anything positive for gun owners.
    I am also neither Republican or Democrat, and rest assured that i, like everyone else here, will be keeping a close eye on them.
    Stop whining and go do something that makes a difference!
    If you think that I may be talking to you, then I am.

  5. #19
    mel
    mel is offline
    Member Array mel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    254
    Well said.

  6. #20
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,574
    Quote Originally Posted by tokerblue View Post
    - Nothing happened because there were 5 pro Second Amendment SC Judges. It wasn't through a lack of trying. I'm not a Republican or Democrat, but I fail to see how this administration has done anything positive for gun owners.
    Uh, and exactly what Federal law was challenged before that "favorable" body of justices? They heard two cases which were effectively local matters. And those supposedly pro 2 A Justices were exceedingly cautious in their Heller ruling. Before that you couldn't get a permit in DC and after that good luck to you as well.

    Congress makes the laws, not the Prez. Congress has done what? Allowed National Park carry. Maybe Congress will finish up with 822 and it will get signed. Then what will all the partisans come here to complain about?

    Too many folks think a President legislates. He doesn't. Remember that fact before you vote for folks who promise you something; be that a chicken in every pot, or immigration reform, or an easing of drug laws.

    Presidential candidates from both parties routinely stump with, "When I'm elected..." Then they get in office and find out that they have to follow the existing laws, follow the existing case law, and if they want something changed in a major way they need to convince Congress to do something--like legislate. Usually Congress doesn't want to do "nothin" at all, so little changes.
    AZJD1968, mr.stuart and Sig 210 like this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    Uh, and exactly what Federal law was challenged before that "favorable" body of justices? They heard two cases which were effectively local matters. And those supposedly pro 2 A Justices were exceedingly cautious in their Heller ruling. Before that you couldn't get a permit in DC and after that good luck to you as well
    .

    +1

    For those who think the presence of five liberal justices will gut our Second Amendent rights: Google up stare decisis. Stare decisis is the reason Roe v. Wade has not been overturned.

    Everyone who owns a gun should read this one:

    Analysis: 2d Amendment extension likely : SCOTUSblog

    The first argument to collapse as the hearing unfolded was the plea by the lawyer for gun rights advocates, Alan Gura of Alexandria, Virginia, that the Court should “incorporate” the Second Amendment into the 14th Amendment through the “privileges or immunities” clause. In the first comment from the bench after Gura had barely opened, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., noted that the Court had essentially scuttled that argument with its ruling in the SlaughterHouse Cases in 1873. And within a few minutes, Justice Antonin Scalia — the author of the Heller opinion and the Court’s most fervent gun enthusiast — was sarcastically dismissing the “privileges or immunities” argument.

    “Why,” Scalia asked Gura, “are you asking us to overrule 140 years of prior law….unless you are bucking for a place on some law school faculty.” The Justice said the “privileges or immunities” argument was “the darling of the professorate” but wondered why Gura would “undertake that burden.” And Scalia noted that the “due process” clause — an open-ended provision that he has strongly attacked on other occasions– was available as the vehicle for incorporation, and added: “Even I have acquiesced in that.” Gura somewhat meekly said “we would be extremely happy:” if the Court used the “due process” clause to extend the Second Amendment’s reach.
    The Supreme Court refused cert in this case:

    Supreme Court refuses potentially landmark gun-control case - CSMonitor.com

  8. #22
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,574
    Barf. Sooner or later they need to take the Slaughter House cases and toss them out the window. And not because of the gun issue. Those and a few others in the post civil war 1870s-1880s, have caused us all a legacy of difficulty in a variety of areas of our lives.

    Anyway, what the posted material shows is that the supposed pro-2A judges on the conservative side of the bench are exceedingly cautious, and are not about to move in a way the remakes most of our gun laws.

    What we got is pretty much what we are going to have, for a very very long time to come. Change will happen in either direction in exceedingly incremental ways.

    My take is that except perhaps for Thomas, none of the Justices give a hoot about the SD aspect of gun ownership.

    I think Justice Scalia is fundamentally a bird shooter; sportsman.
    I suspect that Alito has never held one in his hands (just 'cause he is from Jersey).
    Roberts is a basically a pro- big business dude who has little appetite for concerning himself with individual liberties; unlike Scalia. He also tends to lean toward whatever restriction Uncle wishes to place on the rest of us.

    Our hope lies outside of the Supremes.
    822 if it happens is about the best we can expect for quite some time.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  9. #23
    Member Array Con43's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    33
    All you obama supporters say what you will,but a leopard doesn't change it's spots. Good,bad or indiffrent obama is what he is a politician who has been anti gun from the beginning. If elected to a second term where he has no worry's about public opinion or re-election thoughts you will see the true anti gun obama.JMO I could be wrong...............As to his signing the National Parks carry I believe it was tacked on to what he considered a more important bill.

  10. #24
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,636
    I got into a debate with someone about that, who wanted support that Obama was anti-2a. The list of actions of this Admin and Obama (judge me by the people i appoint) have done or tried to do ... just the list.. was 4 pages long. Let's hope his supporters wake up.

    One word, Andrew Traver over the ATF, the most anti-gun man you'ld want to meet , who believes none of us should own one.

    OK, I WILL take Obama at his word, and judge him by the people he appoints. We want to start in on Holder and about 90% of his Administration being anti-gun, the EPA wanting to restrict ammo due to "lead" , ... come on guys, quit drinking the koolaid.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  11. #25
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    The SCOTUS ruling was a lukewarm endorsement of our Second Amendment rights: No more, no less.

  12. #26
    Member Array Troll1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Eastern Oregon
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by AZJD1968 View Post

    I am basing my posts on the reality that nothing has happened under this administration to take away my guns or my right to own them. And I refuse to buy into the BS that I hear from the media, NRA, ammo companies, and gun companies who have a vested interest in scaring me into following an agenda. I will not tow a party line.


    I have a feeling that the millions of guns sold after he got elected had something to do with it.
    If Eric holder so much as breathes those words again.... look for another instant shortage.

  13. #27
    Member
    Array NETim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    455
    Wasn't the admin arguing against us in the Heller case?
    I think, therefore I am armed.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

a current administrative issue in a newspaper

,
current administrative issue in a newspaper
,
current discussions on 2nd amendment
,
current firearm issues
,

current gun issues

,
current gun issues in the u.s.
,
current gun problems
,
current issues on guns
,
current isues on guns
,
current second amendment issues
,
current us gun issues
,
obama
,
recent opinions on gun issues
,
what are the current gun issues
,
what are the current gun issues in america
Click on a term to search for related topics.