Dead Eye Dick to aisle six.
Understated, and keen. ^^^No it was written for the politics in existence at the time and it is a ridiculous idea that that has any relevance today.
Crime and personal self-protection did not enter in within these notes and written thoughts. Nor did natives, whatsoever. Slaves were barely mentioned. How to balance federal and state use of the milita was the entire thrust, with eventual reluctant accommodations for pacifists. Standing down the feds was in play, but only by the practiced virtu of a sharp militia. The feds could stand down any insurrection, where the state militia might be questionable.written for the politics in existence
Hi bpm. Sure, okay, I'll look for it. But this will be the third time and I don't need to spam mate. Read the threads, try using search words to pursue the topic discussions.Hmm, I can't seem to find a SCOTUS decision that states this, Joe. Want to find a quote that actually states this, or are you going to just run with Henderson's dream?
(Caetano herself was carrying a stun gun in public, but the Massachusetts ban nor the Massachusetts high court decision distinguished home possession of a stun gun from possession in public; and though the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court stated that “The conduct at issue in this case falls outside the ‘core’ of the Second Amendment, insofar as the defendant was not using the stun gun to defend herself in her home,” the court categorically said that “the Second Amendment right articulated by Heller” does not “cover stun guns,” without distinguish home possession from public possession. The Caetano Supreme Court opinion thus doesn’t decide whether the Second Amendment applies to possessing stun guns — or any other weapons — in public places.)
I would of expected that the Caetano ruling was short enough that you wouldn't need someone to summarize it for you,Bpm, here I get the pleasure of hooking you up, again, with Eugene Volokh. He is the cleanest, most stalwart scholar in your camp. IMO. He is your best means to shut me up, by the way. Enjoy.
This is an ad hominem without comment about the quality content. Again. As you can see, stun gun rights are not granted outdoors by Caetano.I would of expected that the Caetano ruling was short enough that you wouldn't need someone to summarize it for you,
If the majority were correct, then any state “would be free to ban all weapons except handguns, because handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense in the home.” Caetano, 136 S. Ct. 1032
(Kolbrep90)“the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons’” has been prohibited as a matter of “historical tradition.” Id. at 627; see Caetano v. Massachusetts, 136 S. Ct. 1027, 1028 (2016)
I didn't see Kolbe coming. I couldn't believe it, especially their extension of intermediate scrutiny. What happened?Oh yes, the Kolbe ruling. The one where a group of "learned" judges explained to us that technology that is over 100 years old is dangerous and unusual.
How many more times do we have to see these assault weapon tragedies before you finally give up your assault weapon, Joe?As the Fourth CIrcuit justices considered AW's, police were mowed down by AW's, TWICE. (Baton Rouge and an attack on a Dallas Police station). The judges came out swinging, eh?
You are losing sleep and wasting bandwidth in your dedication to openly grab guns. Mine, badlat's, wofsey's, Spatial's. What's up with that? How would this benefit you, if you don;t mind my asking? Is it just to annoy, what am I missing?How many more times do we have to see these assault weapon tragedies before you finally give up your assault weapon, Joe?
I tried, but it only works on people who read so obviously won't work on you.FULL DISCLOSURE TO PREVENT AN ATTACK FROM DEAD EYE DICK (and to gratuitously quote Pooplius). Another major-pro-rights victory can be found in the big temporary injuction in CA. So count four gun rights victories in the courts after McDonald. Am I right so far? Bueller, care to dump some cases into this conversation?
If you get too silly, it's not worth reading. That would be on you. It's 2018, the mass killings have bad optics, while the courts organize a blurry stream constitutional restrictions. A pattern, with the clock ticking, and you present prolonged silliness and nonsense. Dead Eye Dick has stepped up to do your job these days.