The justices who voted to deny cert did not want to fact the choice between intellectual and legal honesty and what they see as desired public policy.
Realz vs Feelz.
-JR
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
The justices who voted to deny cert did not want to fact the choice between intellectual and legal honesty and what they see as desired public policy.
The justices who voted to deny cert did not want to fact the choice between intellectual and legal honesty and what they see as desired public policy.
Realz vs Feelz.
-JR
We're so screwed when Hitlary gets in and puts two more libs on the SC.
Yup. SCOTUS has a case law bomb on their hand. If you put Miller and Heller together, the Hughes Amendment and NFA are clearly unconstitutional and (this is stretching) carrying full auto m4s everywhere should probably be allowed.
Because R nominated ones have been so supportive of freedom?? .
European laws are written differently than American. In Europe, unless they have laws saying you're allowed to do "X", it's not legal. Completely opposite of American law, which, unless it's written that you can't, it's legal.And this is why the US will almost certainly end up going the way of the UK and Australia.
European laws are written differently than American. In Europe, unless they have laws saying you're allowed to do "X", it's not legal. Completely opposite of American law, which, unless it's written that you can't, it's legal.
If American legislators attempted to take our possessions, especially our guns, it would end poorly, and they know it. They're only willing to go so far, even the ones who have gone full retard, like Feinstein and Rosenthal.
Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Scalia dissented. See page 12:
http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/120715zor_6j37.pdf
I think public attention generated by recent shootings have given some of the justices cold feet. Still holding out for Caetano which was not in today's orders.
They lack the courage to support freedom and liberty.
Yup. SCOTUS has a case law bomb on their hand. If you put Miller and Heller together, the Hughes Amendment and NFA are clearly unconstitutional and (this is stretching) carrying full auto m4s everywhere should probably be allowed.
Incorrect, end of debate.European laws are written differently than American. In Europe, unless they have laws saying you're allowed to do "X", it's not legal. Completely opposite of American law, which, unless it's written that you can't, it's legal.
European laws are written differently than American. In Europe, unless they have laws saying you're allowed to do "X", it's not legal. Completely opposite of American law, which, unless it's written that you can't, it's legal.
Asking the unelected lifetime political appointees on the supreme court to rule on something that the fed gov is constitutionally not empowered to pass laws on is bound to end badly
The right solution remains at the state level
Not this shit again. I thought you were already warned:Until a CLEAR majority of SC Justices adopt an attitude that is represented by the dissent below from Scalia and Thomas we are all better off with these ISSUES being decided at the state level....and if you dont like what your state is doing then MOVE and deny them your vote and your tax dollars
Cut the shit or you're out.
No it won't, we'll just devolve further into two diametrically opposed groups of citizens.And this is why the US will almost certainly end up going the way of the UK and Australia.
The justices who voted to deny cert did not want to fact the choice between intellectual and legal honesty and what they see as desired public policy.
Ailto and Roberts are unsure of where Kennedy is at, so they punted, allowing Scalia and Thomas to write a template on how to proceed in the future.
They can't do anything and won't because they all know that Miller was a huge mistake. Heller clearly was an attempt to skirt the line between reversing Miller and doing nothing. They knew the decision they wrote would raise all of the problems we're pointing out and now they're terrified of the next decision because they painted themselves into a corner.
Either they strike down all AWBs forever thereby nullifying Miller and suddenly literally ALL federal gun laws become void by necessity, or they support AWBs which effectively allows a "legitimate law" path to full bans on all mag fed rifles.
They don't want either of those, mostly because they are cowards and don't want change.
It's not an either-or proposition, though... they always have an out though, they could still EASILY rule that a typical, federal style AWB is invalid because the firearms at this point banned by such a law are indeed in common use, but also but proffer that garbage like the NFA is valid under the "reasonable restrictions" bullshit, because of the long amount of time the NFA has been in effect and has gone uncontested. Basically "reasonable restrictions" is an excuse with a universal adapter on it, and they can get away with it, especially on stuff that is considered old legacy issues like NFA, Prohibited Persons, GCA68, etc. They already more or less laid down a plank for that in Heller saying that some limited restrictions are "okay". They just don't want to elaborate on the issue I think because of what Smash05 says (maybe Kennedy is wonky... after all he did vote against cert, I believe) or they are just too big of wussbags and don't want to hear the antis whine forever afterwards after they get tiger uppercutted in the mouth again.
-Mike
I don't see how you rule common use and not raise a further tide of challenges for other military standard issue hardware. If they take a common use tack, there's a shot ton of more equipment that would fit that category.
Yup. SCOTUS has a case law bomb on their hand. If you put Miller and Heller together, the Hughes Amendment and NFA are clearly unconstitutional and (this is stretching) carrying full auto m4s everywhere should probably be allowed.
Remember to that AWB is a strict ban without exception, whereas the NFA is basically a tax. If the ban on new machine gun transfers were struck down, the NFA as a tax and license scheme is probably Constitutional, assuming it is effectively at this point a deminimus tax. The AWB as presently constructed is an all or nothing proposition, with a grandfather clause.
I know this isn't the first line of defense when we're talking about inherent rights - but if the government decides they're going to go confiscate guns - we are also talking about another legal problem.
They're demanding you turn over your PROPERTY.
Are they going to compensate me for that?
This is just a back of a napkin calculation - but if there's 300 million guns in the country - and those guns are worth on the average of $500 each - we're talking about......
$150,000,000,000
That's 150 BILLION dollars. Who's coughing up the money for that?
if the gays wanted machine guns to be sold at 7-11s, it would be law.
Remember to that AWB is a strict ban without exception, whereas the NFA is basically a tax. If the ban on new machine gun transfers were struck down, the NFA as a tax and license scheme is probably Constitutional, assuming it is effectively at this point a deminimus tax. The AWB as presently constructed is an all or nothing proposition, with a grandfather clause.
I know this isn't the first line of defense when we're talking about inherent rights - but if the government decides they're going to go confiscate guns - we are also talking about another legal problem.
They're demanding you turn over your PROPERTY.
Are they going to compensate me for that?
This is just a back of a napkin calculation - but if there's 300 million guns in the country - and those guns are worth on the average of $500 each - we're talking about......
$150,000,000,000
That's 150 BILLION dollars. Who's coughing up the money for that?
NFA as a tax is a lie though, if it was "just about the tax" it could be simply collected by an FFL and then a transfer effectuated like any other title 1 firearm.
Not to mention, when's the last time you had to get FINGERPRINTS and a signoff from a police chief, or have a corp/llc/trust just to pay some taxes on something you bought?
The $200 is just window dressing for the endless pile of bullshit it takes to get that one little stamp.
It'd be different if you could just walk into an 07 plonk your extra 200 bucks down on the counter and walk out with the SBR or
whatever. Instead you have to wait friggan months. A right delayed is a right denied.
-Mike