News:

And we're back!

Main Menu

Assault Weapons Ban Before U.S. Supreme Court

Started by jimmy olsen, October 11, 2015, 06:56:07 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages1 2
User actions

jimmy olsen

October 11, 2015, 06:56:07 PM
I would think this is a bit of a toss up, with a slight lean towards uphold

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/assault-weapon-ban-u-s-supreme-court-n442056

Quote

A federal district judge upheld the law, and so did a federal appeals court panel by a 2-1 vote.

Central to the dispute is the Supreme Court's 2008 ruling that, for the first time, said the Constitution's Second Amendment provides an individual right to own a handgun for self-defense.


While it was a watershed ruling for gun rights, it also said "dangerous and unusual weapons" can be restricted.
It is far better for the truth to tear my flesh to pieces, then for my soul to wander through darkness in eternal damnation.

Jet: So what kind of woman is she? What's Julia like?
Faye: Ordinary. The kind of beautiful, dangerous ordinary that you just can't leave alone.
Jet: I see.
Faye: Like an angel from the underworld. Or a devil from Paradise.
--------------------------------------------
1 Karma Chameleon point

Archy

#1
October 12, 2015, 12:31:51 AM
NRA will shoot this down.

Admiral Yi

#2
October 12, 2015, 01:10:23 AM
Quote from: Archy on October 12, 2015, 12:31:51 AM
NRA will shoot this down.

The NRA doesn't have a great deal of leverage with the Supreme Court.

Zanza

#3
October 12, 2015, 01:32:57 AM
Isn't the point of a weapon to be dangerous?

Eddie Teach

#4
October 12, 2015, 01:47:20 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 12, 2015, 01:10:23 AM
Quote from: Archy on October 12, 2015, 12:31:51 AM
NRA will shoot this down.

The NRA doesn't have a great deal of leverage with the Supreme Court.

They might not have the pull, but they do have the aim.
To sleep, perchance to dream. But in that sleep of death, what dreams may come?

Berkut

#5
October 12, 2015, 07:43:09 PM
The entire assault weapons ban idea is just stupid. It is a meaningless restriction that gives the NRA an easy way to point out how completely ridiculous gun control nuts are, and will not and cannot make a single bit of difference to the problem.
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Berkut

#6
October 13, 2015, 10:23:31 AM
If we want to accomplish the following:

1. Reduce the number and deadliness of mass shootings in America.
2. Reduce the overall incidences of gun violence in America.

What are actual, real, useful, and practical first steps towards that effort? To *include* the realization that the current political climate means that responses like "Ban guns! The UK has hardly any guns and they have lots less violence!" are largely useless. I don't mind ideas that are politically difficult, but impossible ones are not interesting.

What can we do knowing that there are already 300 million guns in the US, and that simply isn't going to change?

What is a reasonable, rational, and useful set of first steps?
"If you think this has a happy ending, then you haven't been paying attention."

select * from users where clue > 0
0 rows returned

Baron von Schtinkenbutt

#7
October 13, 2015, 10:40:31 AM
Quote from: Berkut on October 13, 2015, 10:23:31 AM
If we want to accomplish the following:

1. Reduce the number and deadliness of mass shootings in America.
2. Reduce the overall incidences of gun violence in America.

What are actual, real, useful, and practical first steps towards that effort? To *include* the realization that the current political climate means that responses like "Ban guns! The UK has hardly any guns and they have lots less violence!" are largely useless. I don't mind ideas that are politically difficult, but impossible ones are not interesting.

What can we do knowing that there are already 300 million guns in the US, and that simply isn't going to change?

What is a reasonable, rational, and useful set of first steps?

The first step is to try to ground the discussion in reality.  Both sides of this highly-polarized debate have a point, but each thinks their point is the only right one and that the other side's is simply an excuse.

The majority of violent crimes in the US are perpetrated with firearms.  However, even if all gun crimes were miraculously prevented we would still be the most violent nation in the developed world per capita, and by a decent margin.  Our issues with violent crime transcend guns, but guns are exacerbating the issues.  The anti-gun lobby does not want to accept the former, and the pro-gun lobby does not want to accept the latter.

Valmy

#8
October 13, 2015, 10:43:08 AM
We kill silly amounts of people with knives.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Razgovory

#9
October 13, 2015, 10:51:05 AM
We should seriously consider banning murder.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Valmy

#10
October 13, 2015, 10:52:59 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 13, 2015, 10:51:05 AM
We should seriously consider banning murder.

If we outlaw murder only criminals will murder.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."

Razgovory

#11
October 13, 2015, 12:34:58 PM
More seriously, I would support giving judges more sweeping powers to enforce hospitalization of people at risk of violent and self-destructive behavior.  Of course, it'll cost a lot more money as well...
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

DGuller

#12
October 13, 2015, 12:56:03 PM
Quote from: Berkut on October 13, 2015, 10:23:31 AM
What can we do knowing that there are already 300 million guns in the US, and that simply isn't going to change?
Next to nothing. 

The only thing that may work is making it a real pain the ass to get a handgun.  Not prohibitively hard, but hard enough to make you embark on the process only if you're really sure you want it.  That would at least cut down on heat of the moment gun homicides and suicides.  But even that probably goes much farther than what practical reality would allow.

Razgovory

#13
October 13, 2015, 01:00:23 PM
There are 300 million guns in the country, but the vast majority of them are only owned by a small percentage.
I've given it serious thought. I must scorn the ways of my family, and seek a Japanese woman to yield me my progeny. He shall live in the lands of the east, and be well tutored in his sacred trust to weave the best traditions of Japan and the Sacred South together, until such time as he (or, indeed his house, which will periodically require infusion of both Southern and Japanese bloodlines of note) can deliver to the South it's independence, either in this world or in space.  -Lettow April of 2011

Raz is right. -MadImmortalMan March of 2017

Valmy

#14
October 13, 2015, 01:05:09 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on October 13, 2015, 12:34:58 PM
More seriously, I would support giving judges more sweeping powers to enforce hospitalization of people at risk of violent and self-destructive behavior.  Of course, it'll cost a lot more money as well...

Hey all the Republicans came out saying mental health was the problem. Maybe somebody should see if the Republican congress is interested in doing something about mental health.
Quote"This is a Russian warship. I propose you lay down arms and surrender to avoid bloodshed & unnecessary victims. Otherwise, you'll be bombed."

Zmiinyi defenders: "Russian warship, go fuck yourself."
Print
Go Up Pages1 2
User actions