Author Topic: Well alrighty now. (Read 834 times)

magooch · « **on:** June 28, 2010, 05:29:12 AM »

The Supreme Court of the United States just did a good. They have ruled that a person does have a right to keep and bear arms at least in your home, in spite of state laws to the contrary.

The anti-gunners are now free to go berserk. Goody, goody.

Land_Owner · « **Reply #1 on:** June 28, 2010, 05:57:30 AM »

We DO NOT NEED a Federal Judge to declare the God Given Rights we already posses!

Keeping them from being usurped by the Liberals, Leftists, and Anti's is another matter entirely...

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #2 on:** June 28, 2010, 06:01:27 AM »

You see it was a 5-4 decision. Hope the 5 conservative judges can stay on through this liberal administration until another conservative gets elected. I do know they are younger than some of the liberals appointed by Carter and Clinton. This is another reason we sometimes must vote for the lessor of two evils. Presidents appoint cabinet members and appoint various burearcracy chiefs who set the tone for everything, like health care, environment, regulations, etc. At least a moderate or conservative will be more fair in their administration, and not be so inclined to mandate things without a vote. The also appoint supreme court judges, and various other federal court judges.

powderman · « **Reply #3 on:** June 28, 2010, 06:51:55 AM »

Great news, it should have been 9-0. Darned libs. I bet osama is having a hissy fit, foiled again. The scary part is that there was NO REASON for it to have been voted on, seems plain to me. POWDERMAN.

subdjoe · « **Reply #4 on:** June 28, 2010, 06:54:55 AM »

text of McDonald decision

214 pages, enjoy the light reading.

Now that the 2nd is incorporated against the States, maybe we can get some of the CA laws overturned.

AtlLaw · « **Reply #5 on:** June 28, 2010, 07:05:02 AM »

Quote from: subdjoe on June 28, 2010, 06:54:55 AM

text of McDonald decision

Thaks for the url Joe!

subdjoe · « **Reply #6 on:** June 28, 2010, 11:10:36 AM »

Quote from: AtlLaw on June 28, 2010, 07:05:02 AM

Quote from: subdjoe on June 28, 2010, 06:54:55 AM
text of McDonald decision

Thaks for the url Joe!

My pleasure, sir. Just doing my duty as a concerned citizen.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #7 on:** June 28, 2010, 11:24:15 AM »

I know this sounds great but from past experince it is important what else this means . I glanced at part of the decision and it seems the court would allow some restriction to occure . So would that be like not toting in a state or local court room , a school etc. OR will some new area surface that will be even harder to deal with ? Excuse me for being this way but no good deed goes unpunished ! Would large businesses now be able to restrict employees ? If the state can't stop you from having a gun can it stop a business from making rules ? This will get interesting I am sure .

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #8 on:** June 28, 2010, 11:47:03 AM »

Getting a concealed carry permit (from a friend in NY) in New York state requires background check at local sheriffs office. However, a sheriff can hold it up for 6 months or more, and sometimes some have waited 2 years. Now in NYC they refuse them based on "need".

briarpatch · « **Reply #9 on:** June 28, 2010, 03:19:11 PM »

lets see how long it will take Mcdonald to get a gun. If like Heller he want have one, ever.

hillbill · « **Reply #10 on:** June 28, 2010, 03:41:58 PM »

i dont understand why we are wasteing our good supreme courts time on something that is already obviously stated by our founders.RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS. Not just where yu want to let us, everywhere.includeing crime ridden cities where we need it the most.

wreckhog · « **Reply #11 on:** June 28, 2010, 05:15:26 PM »

Quote from: Dixie Dude on June 28, 2010, 11:47:03 AM

Getting a concealed carry permit (from a friend in NY) in New York state requires background check at local sheriffs office. However, a sheriff can hold it up for 6 months or more, and sometimes some have waited 2 years. Now in NYC they refuse them based on "need".

You get permits issued by a county. County judges differ. In my county, it is 2 months. 2 miles away? 1 year.

Heather · « **Reply #12 on:** June 29, 2010, 06:29:58 AM »

He who giveth can taketh away! Having the supreme court rule on this matter is unbelievable to me. Shamefully, in this society it is perfectly acceptable to challenge the Bill Of Rights. It is an outrage that this ever saw the inside of a court room. Now it is obviously NOT viewed as Our God Given right to protect ourselves, but something our Government ALLOWS! With what seems like a win for gun rights is really a loss for freedom! Now not only is the president set that Our God Given Rights are now a matter for a court to decide, but it also slams the minds of the American public that YES the Federal Government can and will overrule States rights.

Now don't get me wrong I feel that NO STATE should be allowed to trample on the Bill of Rights, it is just that voting on this matter right in the middle of the California and Arizona issues gives the Fed a boost. I can just hear it now, "You didn't hear the right winged nuts complaining when the Fed overruled the states on Gun rights, but now that we want to let the Fed trample the States because we don't like their law they want to throw a fit!" This whole mess is just maddening!

Heather

steg · « **Reply #13 on:** June 29, 2010, 08:14:45 AM »

Heather you definatley have a point there, I think that it's a set-up for their long range plans, now it seems that it is our right by VOTE, and now as such it can be voted down next time, when they see fit to do it.............steg

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #14 on:** June 29, 2010, 09:23:22 AM »

Even if you only have a choice between and moderate and a liberal, at least the moderate will help move things to the conservative side.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #15 on:** June 29, 2010, 10:08:56 AM »

Quote from: Heather on June 29, 2010, 06:29:58 AM

He who giveth can taketh away! Having the supreme court rule on this matter is unbelievable to me. Shamefully, in this society it is perfectly acceptable to challenge the Bill Of Rights. It is an outrage that this ever saw the inside of a court room. Now it is obviously NOT viewed as Our God Given right to protect ourselves, but something our Government ALLOWS! With what seems like a win for gun rights is really a loss for freedom! Now not only is the president set that Our God Given Rights are now a matter for a court to decide, but it also slams the minds of the American public that YES the Federal Government can and will overrule States rights.

Now don't get me wrong I feel that NO STATE should be allowed to trample on the Bill of Rights, it is just that voting on this matter right in the middle of the California and Arizona issues gives the Fed a boost. I can just hear it now, "You didn't hear the right winged nuts complaining when the Fed overruled the states on Gun rights, but now that we want to let the Fed trample the States because we don't like their law they want to throw a fit!" This whole mess is just maddening!

Heather

Heather along time ago our fore fathers agreed to set up a govt. in doing so they had the fore sight to see our rights needing to be defended and gave us the tools to do so . Keep in mind that the court upheld a right , it worked as we would hope . And we hope other rights will be up held

magooch · « **Reply #16 on:** June 30, 2010, 04:33:30 AM »

Most if not all of our rights are always just one vote and one, or two Presidential appointments away from being abolished. I wish that our founders had been a bit more clear in some of their documents, but it wouldn't matter to libs; they can rationalize anything. Most of the time they don't even try to justify it when they counter well established doctrines. It's for our own good--ya know.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #17 on:** June 30, 2010, 10:28:08 AM »

they did the 2nd admn. and the little statement about watering the tree of liberty with blood . These old guys had just won a war that cost lives and fortune for many of them . They didn't give us a free ride just a chance . If we aren't willing to take care of it we will lose it !

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #18 on:** June 30, 2010, 11:42:06 AM »

The libs claim the Constitution is a living document that has to be changed from time to time, not a concrete set of rules to base our laws on. Same with the Bible, God laid out the 10 commandments, and (3) religions are supposed to obey them. They are pretty plain. Some deal with our relationship to God, the rest our relationship to our fellow men. No killing, no stealing, no lieing, no adultry. Simple, yet some still cannot go without disobeying one. Bill of Rights are a statement of our rights and the government isn't supposed to pass laws against them.

SHOOTALL · « **Reply #19 on:** June 30, 2010, 11:48:13 AM »

Quote from: Dixie Dude on June 30, 2010, 11:42:06 AM

The libs claim the Constitution is a living document that has to be changed from time to time, not a concrete set of rules to base our laws on. Same with the Bible, God laid out the 10 commandments, and (3) religions are supposed to obey them. They are pretty plain. Some deal with our relationship to God, the rest our relationship to our fellow men. No killing, no stealing, no lieing, no adultry. Simple, yet some still cannot go without disobeying one. Bill of Rights are a statement of our rights and the government isn't supposed to pass laws against them.

With the Bible its up to the indivisual as no one will ansewer for your sins but you !
As for the Consitution we all agree to live by it , if ya don't agree if it changes then follow your heart . A couple miles from where i sit a guy said " give me liberty or give me death "
Pretty simple really if what you belive in means more that what you have you will do just fine .

Dixie Dude · « **Reply #20 on:** June 30, 2010, 12:34:13 PM »

True about the Bible, but a lot of our laws stem from the 10 commandments. Killing, stealing must be dealt with. Adultry involves divorce, children split up, families split up, doesn't suit well with raising wholesome kids. They usually have more problems. Cost people and the state money which could be used more productively so it destroys wealth. Coveting is the precurser to stealing and adultry. The commandments involving God are personal, but half of them deal with each other.

LAREDOBOB · « **Reply #21 on:** June 30, 2010, 01:00:44 PM »

Those people that voted have all taken an oath of office that contains the clause "To support and defend the Constitution". My question is how did it even get so far as to be voted on?