The Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict Is a Chance for Us to Revisit the Issue of Random People Carrying Guns in Public

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  john-russell  •  2 weeks ago  •  59 comments

The Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict Is a Chance for Us to Revisit the Issue of Random People Carrying Guns in Public

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



The Kyle Rittenhouse Verdict Is a Chance for Us to Revisit the Issue of Random People Carrying Guns in Public

We will not revisit it.

The verdict in the trial of Kyle Rittenhouse is the beginning of something, not the end. In all likelihood, it’s at least a milestone on a journey into the deep and the dark that even the most astute observers of the American experiment in its 246th year probably cannot yet fully grasp. But rather than focus on the verdict’s merits, we could, as a nation, take this opportunity to reevaluate whether random citizens should be carrying highly powerful weapons in the street. The gun issue is finished in America, at least in terms of ownership. There are more guns in private possession than people in this country, and nothing will be done about that. It’s over. But we could decide to draw a line somewhere. Keep your guns, but keep them in your house, say. Defend your castle, but the rules are different when you’re out in the public square.

Because you can talk all you want about defense—of yourself or of someone else’s business or whatever—but that is not the purpose of carrying an AR-15 around in the street. We got proof of that outside the courtroom in Kenosha this week, when some all-American winner showed up in military cosplay carrying a rifle. Was he there to defend the courthouse? Seems like there were plenty of actual law-enforcement personnel around—you know, the people whom we as a collective polity have deputized and entrusted with the authority to wield deadly force. Did they need backup from “Maserati Mike”? Well, to be fair, he merely said he was there to exercise his constitutional rights . So he was there to show off his gun. At least he’s honest. That is the purpose of open carry: to communicate the threat of violent force in the public square. It is about projecting power. Thankfully, actual violence in these situations has been rare. But the point is to plant the idea in other people’s minds. I could do it, you know.

There is a reason that courts in England and the United States have upheld the authority of governments to regulate arms in the public square for 700 years. Along the way, human beings have realized that when random people congregate armed in public, the results are not good. (One of the men Rittenhouse shot was also armed with a pistol. The presence of all these deadly weapons does not seem to have ameliorated the situation on that Kenosha street.) But for some time now, the American right and the gun lobby have embraced a vision where the power to continually communicate the threat of violent force is no longer reserved for agents of the state to whom we’ve all agreed to hand over this authority. This power has been spread around, including, it seems, to a teenager who cannot yet legally drink and only recently secured the privilege of operating an automobile. We have fairly strict rules around using cars because they’re dangerous, but they also serve a purpose other than maiming and killing living things. The same cannot be said for guns, and yet the rules can be far fewer for firearms in many jurisdictions. Forget a driver’s test. In some states, you don’t even need a permit to carry a gun around in the street. Some states have invited citizens to bring their guns into bars.

gun-1637349518.jpeg?crop=1.00xw:1.00xh;0,0&resize=640:*

It is, in aggregate, an injection of disorder into our society on the part of the same people who consider themselves the defenders of law and order. The sense of impending chaos this inspires is also useful in that it might convince more people that they themselves need guns. I mean, it’s crazy out there! And this, in turn, will lead to more gun sales. Which will lead to more gun sales. Because there is no indication this is going to stop. The Supreme Court’s conservatives look likely to dismantle a 110-year-old New York law that severely restricts who can concealed-carry guns in public within the state. You can say concealed carry is less nakedly threatening than open carry, but it still offers the prospect of injecting deadly weapons into quotidian encounters. There is no established precedent for the constitutional right to bear arms in public. Your rights are less expansive outside the home because yours are bumping up against the rights of other people. But the conservative Supremes may throw the law out, along with similar policies in other states, and establish that right at a time when the American right wing has embraced Kyle Rittenhouse as a folk hero. Like I said, this is, unfortunately, very likely the beginning of something.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
1  seeder  JohnRussell    2 weeks ago
There is no established precedent for the constitutional right to bear arms in public. Your rights are less expansive outside the home because yours are bumping up against the rights of other people. But the conservative Supremes may throw the law out, along with similar policies in other states, and establish that right at a time when the American right wing has embraced Kyle Rittenhouse as a folk hero. Like I said, this is, unfortunately, very likely the beginning of something.
 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
1.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago

That is a somewhat slippery slope John, and a lot depends on what part of the country you live in. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
Junior Quiet
1.2  Snuffy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago
Like I said, this is, unfortunately, very likely the beginning of something.

Doubtful.  The left said the same thing after many other incidents,  even several incidents that were much more horrific than this simple case of self-defense. Sandy Hook comes to mind.  The problem as I see it is the default standard is always to go after some guns, gotta ban those "evil black guns".  All this chest pounding rather than doing something that might actually make a difference such as looking for root cause. If the gun was truly the root cause then we would be seeing a lot more gun deaths everywhere all the time due to the number of guns out in public. But we don't because the majority of gun owners are responsible and legal. But rather than do the hard thing and find root cause, it's always the same approach. 

IMO if you want to ban guns to stop gun crime then you will need to ban ALL guns and also go door to door to collect them all.  No exceptions..  Of course that hasn't worked very well in any country that tried it, but hey...  maybe this time it will work.  Go for it..   reach out to Congress to get the ball rolling.  

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
1.2.1  Nowhere Man  replied to  Snuffy @1.2    2 weeks ago
IMO if you want to ban guns to stop gun crime then you will need to ban ALL guns and also go door to door to collect them all.  No exceptions..  Of course that hasn't worked very well in any country that tried it, but hey...  maybe this time it will work.  Go for it..   reach out to Congress to get the ball rolling.  

Yeah, it's probably way past time to remind all of them on the how and why this nation was founded, a demonstration of the basis for it's founding is probably what it's going to take....

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
1.3  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @1    2 weeks ago
yours are bumping up against the rights of other people

What rights do you lose when I have a pistol in my waistband? The right to push me down and take my wallet?

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
1.3.1  Texan1211  replied to  squiggy @1.3    2 weeks ago
What rights do you lose when I have a pistol in my waistband? The right to push me down and take my wallet?

None at all.

Some people think you shouldn't defend yourself with  gun even if you are getting the shit kicked out of you if those kicking the shit out of you don't have a gun. Pretty crazy thinking IMO.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
1.3.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Texan1211 @1.3.1    2 weeks ago

Myself personally, if I carry, I always carry concealed. Arizona is a open carry state that allows it's eligible citizens to carry either concealed or openly without a permit. I prefer concealed carry so I don't advertise to a potential nut case that may come after me. That allows me to potentially get the drop so to speak on a potential perp. Living right on the AZ/Mexico border in a largely rural area, a large percentage of the population here do carry.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
2  Jeremy Retired in NC    2 weeks ago

So here we go with another hissy fit because the left didn't get the verdict they want when a person protects themselves.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2    2 weeks ago

Did Kyle Rittenhouse belong in that used car lot that night?   I dont give a damn if he had a "right" to be there. 

 
 
 
Gazoo
Sophomore Silent
2.1.1  Gazoo  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    2 weeks ago

Did the thug/rioters/looters belong in that used car lot that night? 

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
2.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Gazoo @2.1.1    2 weeks ago

We have police/national guard to deal with that. Not 17 year old rambos. 

 
 
 
Gazoo
Sophomore Silent
2.1.3  Gazoo  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 weeks ago

Unless a liberal governor and mayor orders them to stand down.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.4  XXJefferson51  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    2 weeks ago

That you don’t “give a damn” about people’s constitutional rights is no surprise to us at all. 

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
2.1.5  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    2 weeks ago
Did Kyle Rittenhouse belong in that used car lot that night?

Your own rule at the top of the page is that we weren't going backwards. "We will not revisit it."

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.1.6  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1    2 weeks ago
Did Kyle Rittenhouse belong in that used car lot that night?   I dont give a damn if he had a "right" to be there.

WTF does THAT have to do with his ability to rightfully,  legally defend himself?

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
2.1.7  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    2 weeks ago
We have police/national guard to deal with that. Not 17 year old rambos. 

You didn't the night they attacked Rittenhouse.  

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.2  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2    2 weeks ago

Just wait for the hissy fit they will have when they find out since he was found not guilty, his seized rifle will likely be returned to him since it is no longer evidence , thats what usually happens when one is found not guilty ,  And he is of legal age by law  now to have it himself .

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
2.2.1  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2.2    2 weeks ago

They've been freaking out about the weapon all because it's the "big bad, scary AR-15".  

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
2.2.2  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.1    2 weeks ago

well i read some gun rights group is awarding him another AR so now he has 2 .

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
2.2.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @2.2.2    2 weeks ago

Oh hell, people are going to freak out over that.

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
2.2.4  Nowhere Man  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @2.2.3    2 weeks ago
Oh hell, people are going to freak out over that.

Why, it is of no concern of theirs... I own five weapons, each has it's well defined purpose... I've only had to actually use one for it's intended purpose once... I hope I never have to again....

Some of them are very serviceable at cross purposing....  I don't need anymore, I have all the bases of potential need covered, and none of them happen to be an AR15...  (although a couple would qualify to the freaks as a big scary black gun) {chuckle} If I ever get into the kind of argument that KR wound up in I can easily make my points very clear, from quite a ways away....

Those scary skateboard people can freak all they want...

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
Senior Participates
2.2.5  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.2.4    2 weeks ago
Why, it is of no concern of theirs... I own five weapons, each has it's well defined purpose.

That doesn't matter to some of these mouth breathers.  Hell most don't have a clue about weapons.  They call the AR-15 an "assault rifle".  

Remember.  These are the same people that think race had something to do with the Rittenhouse trial (and not guilty verdict).

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3  Buzz of the Orient    2 weeks ago

15rsbn.jpg

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    2 weeks ago

These guns in civilian hands protect the citizens from all enemies, foreign and domestic

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3    2 weeks ago

Well, you can't have it my friend...

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2    2 weeks ago

LOL. Don't even DREAM, "my friend" that I'M the one who wants a gun.  I'm not an American gun-lover.  The meme was obviously aimed at those private citizens to whom guns are an important possession, but you knew that anyway, didn't you (and that's NOT a question).  What a world we live in where people have to have a gun to protect themselves (and that's not a question either).

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2.2  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.1    2 weeks ago

Well Brother, It wasn't directed personally at you, it was directed at the ideal of your meme...

Besides, it's an unfortunate reality in this world and has been for centuries, in fact ever since man started walking on the planet... maybe we should concentrate first in disarming the animals, as they are naturally violent, once we've learned how to do that, (exterminating most of them in the wild in the process) we will have figured out how to do it to ourselves, but I don't hold out a lot of hope for that....

But even if we did, we would still have to learn about how to deal with the biggest and strongest amongst us, you know, the ones that like to dominate all the others...

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.3  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.2    2 weeks ago

Sorry, I didn't realize that your reply "you" to what I posted wasn't aimed at me, or that Gollum was your friend.  LOL  As well, isn't amazing that well over a billion ordinary citizens in China don't need guns to protect themselves. Isn't that a fairly big chunk of the world's population?

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2.4  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.3    2 weeks ago

Gollum was everyone's friend, when you had something he wanted.. {chuckle} Much like Gagool or a Morlock...

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.5  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.4    2 weeks ago

By the way, my friend, I really want you to know that I'm really glad you're back and active on NT again.  

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2.6  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.3    2 weeks ago
isn't amazing that well over a billion ordinary citizens in China don't need guns to protect themselves. Isn't that a fairly big chunk of the world's population?

Hey, if they are happy, I'm happy for them...  Far be it for me to say a citizenry doesn't know what they want, but it would be nice for the government to let them make the choice for themselves wouldn't it?

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2.7  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.5    2 weeks ago
By the way, my friend, I really want you to know that I'm really glad you're back and active on NT again.  

I appreciate that brother, right now life has slowed down a bit so I have some time.. In a bit I may go absent for periods of time as I have some commitments to other websites that need to be maintained.... Also I maintain a small archive of historical drawings that I serve up to a couple of websites that are interested in such for historical and other purposes...

I've been keeping busy.... Very low stress, I don't want another episode like the last one....

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.8  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.6    2 weeks ago
"...it would be nice for the government to let them make the choice for themselves wouldn't it?"

You mean to be able to make a choice between having no gun deaths among more than a billion people or gun violence every single day including mass murders.  If you think the Chinese people would choose "The American Way" instead of not having to be concerned about anyone being shot, somehow I think I know what choice they would make. 

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2.9  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.8    2 weeks ago

Just one question brother...

Where did I say any of that?

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.10  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.8    2 weeks ago

i accept the fact that china can do that , but i am very suspect that they have zero violent crime , or that they do not have criminal organizations . 

 there s one thing i do think you are overlooking though when you tout chinas ability to do as they do . and that is they have a single party government that is strictly authoritarian , in many matters .

 Such is not the case in the good ole US of A , there are multiple parties with multiple levels of difference throughout the governmental structure .

 Now i hope ALL of you are sitting down for what comes next .

lets say i was to wake up tomorrow morning , and a voice from above states that I , little old insignificant me has to choose from 3 choices who is to run this country from now til the end of eternity .

 those 3 choices being 

1 The russians 

2 The chinese 

3 The progressive liberals run currently by the extremem left

Sitting down?

 my choice would be 2 the chinese 

 why? 

they have already made all the mistakes that a singlee party government could possibly make , have come to understand that their political ideology has to be amix that includes capitalism , and they have the knowledge that they have to take dissenters seriously and crime totally out of the picture if possible 

the russians would be a close second only because after all they went through they understand that the people can  be totally controlled forever so some freedoms are allowed .

the last choice is no choice and shouldnt even be one of the choices .

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.11  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.9    2 weeks ago

you didnt say any of that .

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.12  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.2.10    2 weeks ago

LOL.  Of course there is some violent crime.  I didn't say there was none.  My comments were specifically about gun crimes.  The Uyghurs committed violent crimes until they were stopped over four years ago.  There have been a couple of incidents where some deranged old man with a cleaver broke into a primary school and killed some kids.  These incidents are reported, they are not covered up.  But compared to the gun violence in the USA it's a pinhead compared to a mountain. 

As well, do not believe that I think the CPC is infallible.  I have more than once posted things they have done that have upset me, and the latest one is the disappearance of the champion Chinese Tennis Player, perhaps because she accused one of the government's former inner circle of sexual misconduct from a long time ago.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.13  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.4    2 weeks ago

LOL i thought the choice was spot on , if one thinks of it as the representation of a gun grabbing hoplophobe , they act exactly like gollom/smeagle , they attempt to use manipulation and gile and the appearence of being nice and harmless  , to attain something that never was or will be theirs , and when that fails , they resort to threats and violence .

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.14  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.9    2 weeks ago

You said it would be nice if the Chinese people were allowed to make a choice themselves, and since we were talking about guns and gun violence I simply indicated what choice I believed they would make.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.15  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.2.7    2 weeks ago
"In a bit I may go absent for periods of time..."

My reply to that, from one movie maven to another, is a quotation from The Last Samurai.  "I will miss our conversations."

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.16  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.12    2 weeks ago

well those are things we seldom hear , likely due to the control of media , but it is good to hear such things are not exactly perfect .

 now the optimal choice of those 3 i mentioned since i tried to stick with the origional premise of only being able to choose 1 , would be the chinese control with some of the russian freedoms currently allowed ( not soviet era , i think they learned their lesson as did the chinese ) what was the deciding factor for me in making such a choice , was lack of corruption , and how it is dealt with if and when it is dicovered , and the over all safety of the citizens , none of which would be able to be done by the 3rd and none choice . since they have proven to be corrupt , racist ,dishonest, and thieving IMHO.

 i really doubt they would last long under the type of government the other 2 would offer vs the type they offer .

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.17  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.2.16    2 weeks ago

If you are able to watch TV (cable?) channel CGTN (China Global Television Network, which is in English) and/or read the English language China Daily web site you would see that such things, including what happens to corrupt officials, are reported to the world.  

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.18  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.17    2 weeks ago

thanx for the tip , i do internet streaming i will see what is available , mind you , i still understand it isnt quite the same as the freedom of the press here , but lately with all the disinformation , credibility in the press is what down to about the 28% range? cant say just howmuch of it i will or would find credable . 

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
Professor Principal
3.2.19  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @3.2.18    2 weeks ago

Mark, in the second half of 1957 and all of 1958 I was he Editor-in-Chief of my university's newspaper.  It won awards as the best Canadian university weekly newspaper.  We used as our model for format, topic, and complete lack of bias The Christian Science Monitor.  Year after year back then it won the award for being the most unbiased newspaper in America.  Now that it has become somewhat left-leaning not only does IT not win that award, the award had to be discontinued for OBVIOUS reasons - today there simply is NO unbiased news medium.  You simply cannot believe what you read any more.  (Oh God, please bring us back Walter Cronkite).  I used to say that my grandpappy told me not to believe anything you read or hear.  More recently, it's been necessary to add "and half of what you see" because of photoshop and biased journalism using false images from different events.  Since absolutely no news source can be totally relied upon, how can anyone criticize any nation that censors the news?

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2.20  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.19    2 weeks ago
Oh God, please bring us back Walter Cronkite

Amen brother, he retired WAY TO EARLY! even worse, they chose Dan Rather Not Tell the Truth over Mike Wallace... That caused me to abandon the national news media altogether... 

It's been a long downhill slide since the days of Murrow and Cronkite, today it isn't much better than the Pulitzer age, Yellow Journalism reigns supreme....

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
3.2.21  Nowhere Man  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.15    2 weeks ago
quotation from The Last Samurai.  "I will miss our conversations."

As will I brother... but as an offering for understanding...  "...there is indeed something spiritual in this place. And though it may forever be obscure to me, I cannot but be aware of its power."

I don't think I'm ever going to go away fully and completely... {chuckle}

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
3.2.22  Mark in Wyoming   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @3.2.19    2 weeks ago

i remember you telling me that back when we first met , and i too miss  reporters like cronkite , i am just barely old enough to have seen him on TV and remember his retirement , im young enough that when your grandpappy said not to believe everything you read and heard , mine said the same thing and did add the half of what you see .

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Participates
4  Nowhere Man    2 weeks ago

    "But for some time now, the American right and the gun lobby have embraced a vision where the power to continually communicate the threat of violent force is no longer reserved for agents of the state to whom we’ve all agreed to hand over this authority."

John answer me a couple of questions, Please?

WHEN DID THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OVERTURN THE CONSTITUTION? Revoke the 2nd Amendment? To whom did we turn this constitutionally protected authority over to?

I'd just love to hear your answers... (they have to be incredible)

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
4.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Nowhere Man @4    2 weeks ago

I can’t wait to see this, though I won’t be holding my breath…

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
4.2  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Nowhere Man @4    2 weeks ago

Be ready for the crickets chirping.

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
5  Ed-NavDoc    2 weeks ago

Rule of thumb. Never bring a skateboard to a gunfight as you will definitely lose!/sarc

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
6  Mark in Wyoming     2 weeks ago

"the threat of violent force is no longer reserved for agents of the state to whom we’ve all agreed to hand over this authority."

Now that is an interesting line .

 I would agree that that society has somewhat agreed that agents of the state ( police /LEO) do need the authority to use what some would consider  violent force .  It is after all sometimes required of the job they are asked to do .

BUT....

No where can i see or find that we all have agreed that they are the "only ones ". authorized to do so , nor have i relinquished my ability to do so lawfully if it is needed within the boundries of the laws set down by society .

Violent force has never been solely reserved for the agents of the state . which if is believed , is easily corruptable by politics of the moment . otherwise why would there be a need for police "reform"?

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
7  squiggy    2 weeks ago

There is no established precedent for the constitutional right to bear arms in public.

I found this one somewhere  - ..." the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." So where, in that context, would you expect them to be borne? 

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
7.1  Texan1211  replied to  squiggy @7    2 weeks ago

Gee, what a revelation!

Why on earth would anyone think the Amendment doesn't allow it?

Maybe they just don't know what "shall not be infringed" means??

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
7.1.1  squiggy  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1    2 weeks ago

Speaking of context, the often mangled 'well-regulated militia' clause flows much more sensibly when it is taken to mean 'supplied, issued, provisioned, equipped' as those words would have been historically used. For instance, "That canteen is not regulation." I know, it's the only one I could find."

 
 
 
squiggy
Sophomore Quiet
8  squiggy    2 weeks ago

"The Supreme Court’s conservatives look likely to dismantle a 110-year-old New York law that severely restricts..."

Gun owners are, at a minimum, after the 'may issue' states. Those are the states that declare you must have a permit for a particular firearm but the issuing authority is given the power to maybe issue a permit. More moderate states require the issue of a permit absent any contraindication. NY has rigged a game that the people can't win.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
9  Paula Bartholomew    2 weeks ago

I am betting that he will kill again now that he thinks the law won't touch him.  Mommy is probably stuffing his XMas stocking with ammo.

 
 
 
Mark in Wyoming
Professor Silent
10  Mark in Wyoming     2 weeks ago

I am going to laugh if he does exactly what his lawyers says he will do , get on with his life , which likelty entails going back to Arizona to that nursing school he enrolled in and shaking the dust of illinois and wisconsin off his shoes .

 now isnt THAT a scary thought for some of you older folks , he might some day be your nurse when you are in need of medical care ......

 
 
 
Ed-NavDoc
PhD Quiet
10.1  Ed-NavDoc  replied to  Mark in Wyoming @10    2 weeks ago

I was thinking exactly the same thing.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Snuffy


40 visitors