Scalia "Open" To Gun Control?

This is a discussion on Scalia "Open" To Gun Control? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; A "conservative justice" is not necessarily a "conservative." Often the viewpoints align, however. He's also consistent in his viewpoint, and there's nothing new here. That's ...

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 80
Like Tree76Likes

Thread: Scalia "Open" To Gun Control?

  1. #16
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,704
    A "conservative justice" is not necessarily a "conservative." Often the viewpoints align, however. He's also consistent in his viewpoint, and there's nothing new here.

    That's the problems with sound bites in the absence of context.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #17
    VIP Member Array mprp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by 10thmtn View Post
    So - I guess the 2A protects our right to have our very own thermonuclear device?

    How about your own private warship? Attack helicopter? Fighter/bomber?

    How about a tank with functional weaponry? Flamethrower? Anti-tank missile launcher?

    Point is that...YES indeed...there are limits on the 2A. Just like there are limits on the 1A (libel, slander, child porn, etc).

    My personal opinion is this - citizens should be able to have weapons that are equivalent to the basic infantry standard issue weapon. That gets you to the "militia" part of the wording of the 2A.

    I'll go put my Nomex on. This should get interesting...

    Well said 10thmtn. That's pretty much what I figure. But hey, if they'll throw in all the others you've listed above, I'm in, that is, if I could afford it. Not the flamethrower though; I've heard that we're not supposed to use those anymore. And I could attach a 3 pt. on my tank to disc up my field and shoot coyotes all at the same time.
    Vietnam Vets, WELCOME HOME

    Crossman 760 BB/Pellet, Daisy Red Ryder, Crossman Wrist Rocket, 14 Steak Knives, 3 Fillet Knives, Rolling Pin-14", Various Hunting Knives, 2 Baseball Bats, 3 Big Dogs and a big American Flag flying in the yard. I have no firearms; Try the next house.

  4. #18
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,876
    Actually I'd like to have an Apache. Talk about great fun with the coyotes.

    So - I guess the 2A protects our right to have our very own thermonuclear device?
    I'd probably put the limit on bombs just because of the collateral damage and the "hold my beer and watch this" factor.
    The rest of them...nah.

    Whats the difference of being responsible with a M1A1 Abrams or a handgun? We have plently of 18,19and 20 somethings driving some of the most powerful weapons platforms the world has ever seen. That dosent seem to be an issue.

    Its all about accountability. It they screw up prosecute them.
    mprp and packinnova like this.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  5. #19
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,227
    Quote Originally Posted by Rollo View Post
    And THAT ladies and gentleman is where the vast majority of pro gun folks make the mistake that I am convinced will be the downfall of us all. You have equated being conservative with being pro gun. I would venture to guess that you probably also equate being liberal with being anti gun. There is no line to draw. Guns are not a republican or democratic or conservative or liberal issue. If you let yourself believe that they are then your doing EXACTLY what the Brady campaign wants you to. Your convincing all of those non anti gun democrats that to be a democrat you also have to be anti gun. Please, don't help the Brady campaign.
    I know a couple of Democratics that own guns. Should I make them re-register? ;-)
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  6. #20
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,079
    What is this country coming to?

    What this country is coming to is a faulty and downright incorrect sense of justice. There's no discernible sense of right and wrong exhibited within several current generations of citizens. Everyone is more interested in making sure they don't appear to be intolerant.
    pistola, ctr and Dadsnugun like this.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  7. #21
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Originally Posted by 10thmtn
    So - I guess the 2A protects our right to have our very own thermonuclear device?

    How about your own private warship? Attack helicopter? Fighter/bomber?

    How about a tank with functional weaponry? Flamethrower? Anti-tank missile launcher?

    Point is that...YES indeed...there are limits on the 2A. Just like there are limits on the 1A (libel, slander, child porn, etc).

    My personal opinion is this - citizens should be able to have weapons that are equivalent to the basic infantry standard issue weapon. That gets you to the "militia" part of the wording of the 2A.

    I'll go put my Nomex on. This should get interesting...
    My problem is not the idea that these items may or may not need some form of regulations. My problem comes when we ignore the Constitution in doing so. Its more how we are doing it than what we are doing that bothers me. The end justifies the means way of changing the Constitution takes both the people and the States out of the equation.
    Want to give the Government the power to regulate arms then do it. But do it through the amendment process the way its supposed to be done under law.

    Michael
    W9HDG likes this.

  8. #22
    Senior Member Array DPro.40's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    611
    "As an originalist scholar, Scalia looks to the text of the Constitution—which confirms the right to bear arms—but also the context of 18th-century history. “They had some limitations on the nature of arms that could be borne," he told host Chris Wallace."

    I suspect...wait, I know his knowledge is greater than mine concerning 18th century history but, I would like to see the evidence to back this up. Did they mean flintlocks only, no cannons or blunderbuss.
    Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.
    Ronald Reagan

  9. #23
    Member Array BWBracelets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by 10thmtn View Post
    So - I guess the 2A protects our right to have our very own thermonuclear device?

    How about your own private warship? Attack helicopter? Fighter/bomber?

    How about a tank with functional weaponry? Flamethrower? Anti-tank missile launcher?

    Point is that...YES indeed...there are limits on the 2A. Just like there are limits on the 1A (libel, slander, child porn, etc).

    My personal opinion is this - citizens should be able to have weapons that are equivalent to the basic infantry standard issue weapon. That gets you to the "militia" part of the wording of the 2A.

    I'll go put my Nomex on. This should get interesting...


    Yes, if I have the financial ability to purchse an Apache helicopter or an Abrams tank, or a surface to air missle, under the second amendment I am permitted to do so. This should not be restricted. Owning these items does no one harm, just like owning a firearm does no one harm. It is only when I use the item in an act of aggression towards another that it becomes a crime. Whether its killing someone with a knife or rope or bare hands or RPG it is still at its core simply murder.

    www.getcorded.com
    W9HDG likes this.

  10. #24
    Senior Member Array Happypuppy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Small Town USA
    Posts
    865
    He is just stating what has already been done by prior courts. Class 3 firearms is an example.


    Sent via Mental Power

  11. #25
    Moderator
    Array bmcgilvray's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    10,079
    I question the constitutionality of Class 3 but it's "on the books."
    shooterX likes this.
    Charter Member of the DC .41 LC Society

    “No possible rapidity of fire can atone for habitual carelessness of aim with the first shot.”

    Theodore Roosevelt, The Wilderness Hunter, 1893

  12. #26
    Senior Member Array Sig35seven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,115
    Quote Originally Posted by BWBracelets View Post
    Yes, if I have the financial ability to purchse an Apache helicopter or an Abrams tank, or a surface to air missle, under the second amendment I am permitted to do so. This should not be restricted. Owning these items does no one harm, just like owning a firearm does no one harm. It is only when I use the item in an act of aggression towards another that it becomes a crime. Whether its killing someone with a knife or rope or bare hands or RPG it is still at its core simply murder.

    www.getcorded.com
    The 2a doesn't mean you should own any of those. The fore fathers had NO idea of these advanced weapons. Just because you have the money doesn't mean you should have one. I've got news for you... you shouldn't have a nuclear bomb either. I certainly don't want you trying to fly an Apache helicopter over my house.

    Here is a video of a guy who got his hands on a tank. Just look at what the real danger is...

    Guy goes nuts with a tank - YouTube
    "Confidence is food for the wise man but liquor for the fool"

  13. #27
    VIP Member Array peckman28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    2,082
    Quote Originally Posted by Sig35seven View Post
    The 2a doesn't mean you should own any of those. The fore fathers had NO idea of these advanced weapons. Just because you have the money doesn't mean you should have one. I've got news for you... you shouldn't have a nuclear bomb either. I certainly don't want you trying to fly an Apache helicopter over my house.

    Here is a video of a guy who got his hands on a tank. Just look at what the real danger is...

    Guy goes nuts with a tank - YouTube
    Yup. They also had no idea of the internet, phone lines, cars, planes, and on and on and on. Let's ban all technologies not present in the 1780s for fear that they were not envisioned by the founding fathers, and thus not protected by the Constitution. We don't live in a nice bubble free of risk, nor would we want to. Your interpretation of what the Founders may have envisioned is irrelevant to what the text of the Constitution actually says.
    phreddy and shooterX like this.

  14. #28
    Member Array BWBracelets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    87
    My argument in opposition to regulating/denying the purchase of such weapons is not whether it is moral or even a good idea to own them, but rather the idea that there is no crime in purchasing/owning/learning to operate said weapon.

    The only crime would be the aggressive use of the weapon against another person.

    www.getcorded.com
    peckman28 likes this.

  15. #29
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    Quote Originally Posted by Sig35seven View Post
    The 2a doesn't mean you should own any of those. The fore fathers had NO idea of these advanced weapons. Just because you have the money doesn't mean you should have one. I've got news for you... you shouldn't have a nuclear bomb either. I certainly don't want you trying to fly an Apache helicopter over my house.

    Here is a video of a guy who got his hands on a tank. Just look at what the real danger is...

    Guy goes nuts with a tank - YouTube
    The Constitution was not written as a guideline for what individuals should either do or own. It was written to give the Federal Government the basic limited powers they felt were necessary for the protection of the people and the States. The original idea was that if it was not an enumerated power granted to them in the Constitution then they had no legal power to exercise it.

    Michael
    packinnova likes this.

  16. #30
    Ex Member Array Ram Rod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Fayetteville, AR
    Posts
    13,687
    What is this country coming to?
    Exactly. Thing is....we should have been worried where it was going some thirty plus years ago and then we wouldn't have to worry about how it's become and where it's going. Too late is the day we actually know what happened, and it's all due to us sitting back and watching when we should have/could have taken action. Adios amigos....via con Dios.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

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

powered by mybb arguments against weapons of mass destruction
,
powered by mybb constitution
,
powered by mybb food share
,
powered by mybb important women in history
,
powered by mybb las vegas trade show
,
powered by mybb smuggling savage arms
,
powered by mybb taurus firearms
,
powered by mybb women power
,
powered by mybb women's movement
,
scalia describe his carry your own weapons policy
,

scalia gun control

,
scalia gun ownership 2009
,
scalia left gun regulation open
,

scalia on gun control

,
scalia pro gun control
Click on a term to search for related topics.