Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE US Judicial System Thread (merged)

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 21:33:49

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cashmere', 'I')'m very worried that the SC explicitly finds no individual right to own guns.


Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think SCOTUS would have agreed to hear the case if they didn't see it as an opportunity to taken another chunk out of the Bill of Rights.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby AlexdeLarge » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 21:43:26

The court seems to be more concerned about protecting the rights of child rapists and non-citizen enemy combatants than the rights honest law biding Americans.

Your rights will not be taken away all at once....... it will be a slow process. Like the old adage about the frog in hot water. Just increase the heat slowly.....he won't know he is cooking!!

When the oil runs out, and the lights go dark.........they don't want you to have a gun. We are much easier to manage when we can't fight back.

Wake up sheepeople....they are closing the gate and taking you to slaughter!
Viddy well, little brother. Viddy well.
User avatar
AlexdeLarge
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1806
Joined: Tue 20 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: I have a whole ward

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby Homesteader » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 21:54:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AlexdeLarge', 'T')he court seems to be more concerned about protecting the rights of child rapists and non-citizen enemy combatants than the rights honest law biding Americans.

Your rights will not be taken away all at once....... it will be a slow process. Like the old adage about the frog in hot water. Just increase the heat slowly.....he won't know he is cooking!!

When the oil runs out, and the lights go dark.........they don't want you to have a gun. We are much easier to manage when we can't fight back.

Wake up sheepeople....they are closing the gate and taking you to slaughter!


Gotta agree with you. The only line I would change is "Your rights have not been taken away all at once. . ."
"The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…"
Sir Winston Churchill

Beliefs are what people fall back on when the facts make them uncomfortable.
User avatar
Homesteader
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Economic Nomad

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby HEADER_RACK » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 22:02:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he court seems to be more concerned about protecting the rights of child rapists and non-citizen enemy combatants than the rights honest law biding Americans.


Rights are for everyone, no matter how much we hate them. If we decide that the people we hate most don't deserve the same rights that are given to us,then sooner or later we will single out another group then another.After awhile the lines will be so blurred that it will be fine to remove all rights from everyone and it will be legal for them to do it because we let them start doing it in the first place.

Give an inch and they will take a mile.
Nothing is more dangerous than a man with nothing left to lose but has everything left to gain.
User avatar
HEADER_RACK
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Thu 15 Feb 2007, 04:00:00

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby UltraViciousBudgie » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 22:08:12

I don't see the elites allowing a broad 2nd Amendment ruling which would return gun rights to pre-1933. I agree the Supreme Court will strike down the DC ban but will leave the door open to regulations such as licensing. Of course in many places, like NYC, this is the same as an outright ban since only the well-connected can obtain a gun license.
The birds shall re-inherit the earth.

"All crows under heaven are black."
User avatar
UltraViciousBudgie
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Fri 02 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Perched behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 22:20:22

Only reason I see they would ever even consider taking the case is to establish once and for all in a citable precedent that the 2nd amendment is null and void. It's probably a preparatory move for some huge new gun grab by President Obama.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby SILENTTODD » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 22:39:43

Doesn't really matter one way or the other to me. Keep them, hide them, in the worse case scenario. Bureaucracies will be of no consequence in 10 years time. Just make sure you have adequate amounts of modern manufactured ammo to go along with each of your fire arm possessions!
Skeptical scrutiny in both Science and Religion is the means by which deep thoughts are winnowed from deep nonsense-Carl Sagan
User avatar
SILENTTODD
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 928
Joined: Sat 06 May 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Corona, CA

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby AlexdeLarge » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 23:03:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SILENTTODD', 'D')oesn't really matter one way or the other to me.


Hmmmmm...........which other right do you want to relinquish between now and TEOTWAWKI?

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Viddy well, little brother. Viddy well.
User avatar
AlexdeLarge
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1806
Joined: Tue 20 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: I have a whole ward

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby smallpoxgirl » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 23:07:24

It's better if you don't think of them as rights. Think of them as suggestions. Creating a massive government and expecting it not to infringe your rights is like asking your rapist to wear a condom.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby HEADER_RACK » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 23:21:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SILENTTODD', 'D')oesn't really matter one way or the other to me. Keep them, hide them, in the worse case scenario. Bureaucracies will be of no consequence in 10 years time. Just make sure you have adequate amounts of modern manufactured ammo to go along with each of your fire arm possessions!


I have to agree. Rights and laws are fine in a functioning civilization. I don't believe we will have that in five years. Alot of things that we think are of importance now will become meaningless in the near future
Nothing is more dangerous than a man with nothing left to lose but has everything left to gain.
User avatar
HEADER_RACK
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Thu 15 Feb 2007, 04:00:00
Top

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby Jotapay » Wed 25 Jun 2008, 23:24:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'O')nly reason I see they would ever even consider taking the case is to establish once and for all in a citable precedent that the 2nd amendment is null and void. It's probably a preparatory move for some huge new gun grab by President Obama.


Being the person who I am, I would think this true. However, if you heard the questioning when the SCOTUS heard the case (in March, February or whenever it was), Kennedy (a liberal/moderate) was vigorously questioning the validity of the DC handgun ban out of the gate. Scalia and Roberts were also pressing the issue vehemently. Judging by their tone at the outset, I would be extremely surprised if a majority were to chip away at the Second Amendment any further.
Jotapay
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby arretium » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 02:00:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cashmere', 'I')'m very worried that the SC explicitly finds no individual right to own guns.


Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think SCOTUS would have agreed to hear the case if they didn't see it as an opportunity to taken another chunk out of the Bill of Rights.


That made me laugh.
User avatar
arretium
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon 04 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Seattle, WA
Top

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby arretium » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 02:03:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AlexdeLarge', 'T')he court seems to be more concerned about protecting the rights of child rapists and non-citizen enemy combatants than the rights honest law biding Americans.

Your rights will not be taken away all at once....... it will be a slow process. Like the old adage about the frog in hot water. Just increase the heat slowly.....he won't know he is cooking!!


Those two examples are the exception to the rule: this court is only about taking away civil rights. The conservative plurality hasn't met a gov't ceasar of civil rights that it hasn't liked.

You're right about the boiling frog theory. That's exactly what happened in German in 1932. Before they knew it, Riechstag ceded total power to hitler via the Enabling Act.

All we need is some pretext here in the U.S., and then, the gov't can declare martial law.
User avatar
arretium
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon 04 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Seattle, WA
Top

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby arretium » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 02:06:56

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'O')nly reason I see they would ever even consider taking the case is to establish once and for all in a citable precedent that the 2nd amendment is null and void. It's probably a preparatory move for some huge new gun grab by President Obama.


I disagree. I just don't see Kennedy agreeing to a lack of individual gun rights.
User avatar
arretium
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon 04 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Seattle, WA
Top

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby arretium » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 02:09:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'O')nly reason I see they would ever even consider taking the case is to establish once and for all in a citable precedent that the 2nd amendment is null and void. It's probably a preparatory move for some huge new gun grab by President Obama.


Being the person who I am, I would think this true. However, if you heard the questioning when the SCOTUS heard the case (in March, February or whenever it was), Kennedy (a liberal/moderate) was vigorously questioning the validity of the DC handgun ban out of the gate. Scalia and Roberts were also pressing the issue vehemently. Judging by their tone at the outset, I would be extremely surprised if a majority were to chip away at the Second Amendment any further.


Kennedy is no liberal or moderate. He's quite conservative. I realize that you compare him to Scalia/Alito, he doesn't appear conservative. But that's because Scalito are so radical right that they make Mitch McConnell look like a democrat.
User avatar
arretium
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon 04 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Seattle, WA
Top

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby SILENTTODD » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 03:22:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AlexdeLarge', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SILENTTODD', 'D')oesn't really matter one way or the other to me.


Hmmmmm...........which other right do you want to relinquish between now and TEOTWAWKI?

Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III
No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Amendment VII
In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.


You misunderstand me AlexdeLarge. I truly believe the 2nd Amendment guarantees all the others. If you find yourself with a government that wants to change your status from 'Citizen' to 'subject'; it is time as our founding fathers observed to rebel against such a government. How else to you do that than with an armed Citizenry?
Skeptical scrutiny in both Science and Religion is the means by which deep thoughts are winnowed from deep nonsense-Carl Sagan
User avatar
SILENTTODD
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 928
Joined: Sat 06 May 2006, 03:00:00
Location: Corona, CA
Top

Re: The Supreme Court, Peak Oil, Your Right to Bear Arms

Unread postby Homesteader » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 07:43:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'O')nly reason I see they would ever even consider taking the case is to establish once and for all in a citable precedent that the 2nd amendment is null and void. It's probably a preparatory move for some huge new gun grab by President Obama.


Being the person who I am, I would think this true. However, if you heard the questioning when the SCOTUS heard the case (in March, February or whenever it was), Kennedy (a liberal/moderate) was vigorously questioning the validity of the DC handgun ban out of the gate. Scalia and Roberts were also pressing the issue vehemently. Judging by their tone at the outset, I would be extremely surprised if a majority were to chip away at the Second Amendment any further.


Now that you mention it I read something to that effect some months ago on another site. Gives me a little hope.
"The era of procrastination, of half-measures, of soothing and baffling expedients, of delays, is coming to a close. In its place we are entering a period of consequences…"
Sir Winston Churchill

Beliefs are what people fall back on when the facts make them uncomfortable.
User avatar
Homesteader
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1856
Joined: Thu 12 Apr 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Economic Nomad
Top

Re: THE US Judicial System Thread

Unread postby Jotapay » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 10:16:59

The SCOTUS affirmed the second amendment as an individual right and struck down the DC gun ban. 5-4 decision. I'll post the link to the majority opinion when it's available. It was written by Scalia, of course.

Here is the opinion. After a quick scan, I believe that it is about as good as we could have hoped for.
http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=DC_v._Heller
Jotapay
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3394
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00

Re: THE US Judicial System Thread

Unread postby AlexdeLarge » Thu 26 Jun 2008, 10:50:51

Yep....a 5-4 Split. The next President will have the ablility to change the court. Your vote will matter.

Change?? You Better Believe It !!!

At first I thought this was satire...
POSTED BY DAVID HARDY • 7 JUNE 2008 09:16 PM
http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2008/ ... i_thou.php



FACT: Barack Obama voted to allow reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt
the firearms industry.
FACT: Barack Obama wants to re-impose the failed and discredited Clinton
Gun Ban.
FACT: Barack Obama voted to ban almost all rifle ammunition commonly
used for hunting and sport shooting.
FACT: Barack Obama has endorsed a complete ban on handgun ownership.
FACT: Barack Obama supports local gun bans in Chicago, Washington, D.C.,
and other cities.
FACT: Barack Obama voted to uphold local gun bans and the criminal
prosecution of people who use firearms in self-defense.
FACT: Barack Obama supports requiring law-abiding gun owners to register
their firearms.
FACT: Barack Obama refused to sign a friend-of-the-court brief in
support of individual Second Amendment rights in the Heller case.
FACT: Barack Obama wants to eliminate your Right to Carry.
FACT: Barack Obama was a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce
Foundation, the leading source of funds for anti-gun organizations and
"research."
FACT: Barack Obama supported a proposal to ban gun stores within 5 miles
of a school or park, which would eliminate almost every gun store in
America.
FACT: Barack Obama voted not to notify gun owners when the state of
Illinois did records searches on them.
FACT: Barack Obama voted against a measure to lower the Firearms Owners
Identification card age minimum from 21 to 18, a measure designed to
assist young people in the military.
FACT: Barack Obama favors a ban on standard capacity magazines.
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory micro-stamping.
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory waiting periods.
FACT: Barack Obama supports repeal of the Tiahrt Amendment, which
prohibits information on gun traces collected by the BATFE from being
used in reckless lawsuits against firearm dealers and manufacturers.
FACT: Barack Obama supports "one-gun-a-month" sales restrictions.
FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on inexpensive handguns.
FACT: Barack Obama supports a ban on the resale of police issued
firearms, even if the money is going to police departments for
replacement equipment.
FACT: Barack Obama supports mandatory firearm training requirements for
all gun owners and a ban on gun ownership for persons under the age of 21.
Viddy well, little brother. Viddy well.
User avatar
AlexdeLarge
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1806
Joined: Tue 20 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: I have a whole ward

Re: THE US Judicial System Thread

Unread postby snax » Fri 27 Jun 2008, 09:43:29

There's another name for spin, it's called BS.

I don't have time to go through the entire list, but here's the orginal article from the NRA. I suggest that anybody taking any stock in the NRA's position read the reference bills as well. It's very telling who is 'spinning' what, and it's not Barack Obama.

Starting with the first so called 'FACT', the untwisted reality is that Obama, among many others, voted against limiting liability for the gun manufacturers. Wow, that is just so horrible that he decided not to provide special priveleges to gun manufacturers when every other commercial industry also has - or at least had until this week - no limits in liability legislated into law! GASP! Gun manufacturers aren't better than everyone else!!!

Cripes, hanging a FOR SALE sign on a bridge still doesn't make it a bridge for sale.
User avatar
snax
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 75
Joined: Sat 20 Jan 2007, 04:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests