SINCE I'M NOT A LAW PROFESSOR, I WONDER….

Homepage Forums Politics SINCE I'M NOT A LAW PROFESSOR, I WONDER….

This topic contains 14 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by  _Robert_ 49 minutes ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #43393

    Unseen
    Participant

    Upon hearing the Supreme Court’s decision this morning, I’m wondering if it means…

    That I carry my AR-15 into the local elementary school now?

    That I won’t have to go through airport security anymore?

    Also, I wonder if a private business can establish rules banning firepower?

    Jake…any thoughts?

    #43399

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Unseen i hadn’t read or heard news today. So i found the text of the decision and gave it a one half over with one eye closed.

    AS to the first question in re. to carrying i think schools would not be permitted to prohibit entry. As to airport security…same thing. Airports will be permitted status quo to prohibit a weapon. As to private businesses i think they will be able to ban firearms.

    I also think some of the members of the Supreme Court decided before they analyzed. It is so easy when in that position to go where your politics/ideology direct you.

    But the holding was in regards to handguns. So it is quite possible that a state might impose same requirement of special need on an applicant and be denied…have the applicant sue…end up before the supreme court and have the supreme court uphold the state in denying the applicant an AR-15 or some high powered weapon.

    #43400

    I think that the wording used by Justice Thomas is too vague. He  ruled that Americans have a right to carry “commonly used” firearms in public for personal defence.

    Does that only mean handguns or could it include rifles or shotguns if that is what the permit holder commonly uses?

    Even the term commonly used sounds bad. How common is their usage?

    #43401

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Correction* Schools will be able to ban weapons.

    And Reg the holding is specifically handguns.

    #43406

    Unseen
    Participant

    #43407

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Yeah the originalists..

    One of the senators testified a few days ago at the jan 6 committee that the constitution was in his belief divinely inspired. He said it with such reverence. I am sure Jesus and a few of the apostles must have been in their ear.

    As far as the 2nd amendment goes if the framers were most concerned about a citizen’s right to bear arms then the beginning language would have been omitted. At best it serves to muddle the issue. At worst it suggests it is not about the individual at all. Think about it. “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State…
    Seems the framers or the ones who were afraid of the federalists and central power had to be appeased. Each state had to be on the ready in case the federal government jackbooted them in the pants.

    How much more effective would the end of the amendment be standing alone? “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Boom. No issues of interpretation.

    #43409

    Unseen
    Participant

    As to private businesses i think they will be able to ban firearms.

    Then states that want to ban firearms should restructure themselves as businesses.

    #43410

    And Reg the holding is specifically handguns.

    Reg the Federal Farmer (a distant relation) wants to know if his AR-15 will improve the efficiency of a well-regulated militia and insists that he will carry it down town if they ever try to put their Government Hands on his Medicare. They better stay hidden in plain sight.

    #43412

    jakelafort
    Participant

    And Reg the holding is specifically handguns.

    Reg the Federal Farmer (a distant relation) wants to know if his AR-15 will improve the efficiency of a well-regulated militia and insists that he will carry it down town if they ever try to put their Government Hands on his Medicare. They better stay hidden in plain sight.

    Why stop at AR-15s? That is what happens when you are a mindless ideologue. The reasonable approach balancing interests is defenestrated. (That Federal Farmer might ask himself the origin of that Medicare!)

    The court has the latitude to either limit future challenges to the 2nd amendment by using time honored stare decisis (the holding was limited to handguns and weapons of similar lethality) or expanding the state’s limited role in regulating weapons owned by citizens by taking a literalist approach.

    If ya want to hear or read a legal scholar priest who waxes on about the majesty of the law it is Professor Arthur Miller. He looks like he is cast for the Paper Chase.

    #43413

    jakelafort
    Participant

    *or expanding the state’s limited role in regulating weapons owned by citizens by taking a literalist approach.

    limiting the state’s role in regulating weapons…

    #43419

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Unseen,

    Private property owners do have the right to ban weapons from their property…But you’ll notice the overwhelming majority of these mass shooting take place in ostebsibly “gun-free zones.”

    Fortunately, online shopping and plenty of brick-and-mortar businesses that welcome armed citizens means no one has to risk their lives in “gun-free zones.” I engage customers in friendly conversations on their pieces all the time.

    Also, I have long welcomed armed passengers on commercial flights. Israel has had armed pilots and air marshalls on every El Al flight for decades after incidents such as the skyjacking of an El Al plane to Entebbe, Uganda in 1976, and now even has anti-missile technology on every El Al plane. They are the safest fight service in the World.

    Also, if someone on every U.S.flight had so much as a 6-shot .38 revolver and the will to use it against any aggressor, 9/11/2001 would have been just another day. Mohammed Atta and Friends would have seen that they would have gone to Allah with no Kuffir blood on their hands and they would have stayed home.

    • This reply was modified 4 days ago by  TheEncogitationer. Reason: Turning the biggest word of our language "if" to an "of."
    #43423

    Israel has had armed pilots and air marshalls on every El Al flight for decades..

    Great, I am all for that. I suspect most of them were in the army and had military training and are now over the age of 21.  But America is not Israel (as my Israel friends in the USA have often told me). They have a different approach to guns.

    #43486

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Reg,

    Nevertheless, the mere existence of ubiquitous firearms in Israeli society does refute the Progressive saw that the mere presence of guns equals more violence.

    And perhaps Israelis could borrow something from the U.S. too. What if their own government turns Capo or Jüdenrat, as has happened in times past? Will Israelis meekly surrender their weapons then? I would certainly hope not.

    #43487

    Nevertheless, the mere existence of ubiquitous firearms in Israeli society does refute the Progressive saw that the mere presence of guns equals more violence.

    Really? It’s not the mere presence of incompetent or unstable people with guns that equals more violence? Like that other cliché, it not guns that kill people…its people that kill people.

    In Israel you must pass certain criteria before you can get a license. You must have a clean criminal record. A medical note to show you are mentally competent and physical fit from a doctor is required. You can only get one handgun and carry a maximum of 50 bullets at any time. You must take a practical gun safety test from a government approved tester and then you must do a written test on gun safety.

    In 2019 Israel had 2.1 gun deaths per 100K of population while in the USA it was 12.2 per 100K. Civilian gun ownership in the USA is 120 per 100 persons. In Israel it is 6.7 per 100 persons. Ireland has a higher rate of ownership that Israel! Source.  (chart rows 1, 106, 107.) So maybe not as ubiquitous as first thought.

    The difference is down to who can legally bear arms. This approach also greatly lowers the number of gun related suicides. The pass rate to get a license in Israel is about 62% which rules out over one third of applicants. Countries with good gun control laws and with mandatory background checks plus continuous training in safety and storage have fewer deaths. Banning military assault rifles also reduces deaths. Just look to Australia or Scotland after their outlier massacres.

    But to go back to your point about ‘the Progressive saw that the mere presence of guns equals more violence’. If you look just at the situation in the USA, it is the individual States with the highest gun ownership that have the highest rates of gun deaths. Source. More guns = more violence. The difference with Israel (and Switzerland) is that the latter will grant you the right to bear arms when you can prove you are competent and responsible to do so. Becoming 18 years old does not do any of that. Israel also has age restrictions. They have a much better approach. Comparisons made by Conservative commentators between Israel and America are just plain wrong. Contrasting Israel with America would give a more realistic picture.

    In the meantime, America will have to endure the equivalent of 5 Uvalde’s every single day.

    #43488

    _Robert_
    Participant

    Thoughtless gun freaks look a situation in the rearview mirror and think “only if someone had a gun, arm everyone.” They live in a fantasy world where themselves or a teacher, factory worker, or accountant has a magic ability to immediately identify the correct perpetrator(s) AND magically know their next intention AND exert deadly aimed force AND not kill or injure the innocent. Law enforcement and military who spend their entire careers training can’t even do it and so often needlessly shoot the perp. or the innocent.

    So now every hothead on the road or stressed-out, noodle-brain who gets mayo instead of mustard on his whopper and loses their shit is carrying a Glock. Hey that’s OK, twenty other people in the fast-food joint are armed too, so it’ll be OK. It’s fucking moronic.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.