Florida State Seminoles

[eCat]

another aspect of originalism in thinking in regards to the second amendment - how far to you want to take the flintlock/assault rifle analogy?

does freedom of the press only apply to those newspapers printed on single fixed presses? Should we limit tv, radio and the internet because the founding fathers never imagined someone having the ability to instantly send a lie to millions of people instantly? Isn't that the assault rifle equivalent of the press? I mean fuck me - I thought Bon Jovi died! How can that be protected under the First Amendment? On a more serious note, the ability to instantly reach millions of people via internet is a serious responsibility in having the potential to alter elections, create vigilante justice, we've seen it topple governments in the past 2 years.

freedom of religion - do we limit it to Christianity because the founding fathers never imagined a religion that would grow substantially in numbers and be mandated in their belief to replace a democracy with a theocracy?

[aTm]

I can't speak to Scalia's consistency, however I can readily agree that a firearm should be limited to one that can be "bore"? "beared"? by a citizen

"borne"

[sardis]

I doubt you could get all gun manufacturers to boycott state government sales. There is too much money to be made.

[Owlman]

another aspect of originalism in thinking in regards to the second amendment - how far to you want to take the flintlock/assault rifle analogy?

Why I don't believe in originalism, especially since our forefathers argued about what different parts of the Constitution meant as soon as it was written

[hedge]

"Should we limit tv, radio and the internet because the founding fathers never imagined someone having the ability to instantly send a lie to millions of people instantly?"

It's also difficult to know how the founders would've regulated air travel, esp. since I have it on good authority that their reaction to airplanes would've been "IIIIIIIIIEEEEEEEEE!!! IRON BIRD!! IRON BIRD!!!!!"

[crashcourse]

there is a line that needs to be drawn

australia drew it--pretty impressive that 600,000 turned in their weapons

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/1 ... ide_a.html

it will never happen here becuase big money controls the legiislators

even though majority of americans want a ban on assault weapons --weapon manufacturers pay their congressman and senators well so it will never happen

[eCat]

I just saw the list of Executive Orders. Its not quite the hammer dropping I was led to believe Obama would go after

[hedge]

Ask yourself who was doing the leading...

[eCat]

I like expecting doctors to ask crazy people about guns

That actually is going to help in pointing out the unstable people. They will be the people shooting their doctors.

[crashcourse]

I saw where the aurora gunmans shrink was being sued by a victims mom

if shrinks start reporting everything their pateints tell them "in confidence' we are opening up a whole new can of worms

[eCat]

I say go after irresponsible gun owners who leave guns accessible to mentally unstable people.

Instead of doing background checks on people every time they buy a gun, you should just have a continually updated status like the no fly list - and there should be no record of what kind of gun you are buying but whether you are competent enough to own one. You turn in your id, the gun guy calls in and gets a yes or no. Yes, I can sell you a gun, now what kind would you like? Thats the end of it. Whats all this bullshit about telling them what kind of gun I'm purchasing? As if that would have some say in the decision making process.

I would not be adverse to shrinks having a set of criteria to follow and if a person is potentially dangerous based on the predefined criteria, they flag them in the system.

This is all based of course on a crazy person attempting to follow the legal process for obtaining a gun and not buying one in an alley somewhere.

[Bklyn]

there is a line that needs to be drawn

australia drew it--pretty impressive that 600,000 turned in their weapons

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/1 ... ide_a.html

Yeah, that's all well and good but watch what happens when all the Aboriginies expose the fact that all those diggiredoos (sp?) they have are actually shoulder-held rocket launchers and move to take their country back. What will the world say then?

[eCat]

Not sure of the validity of this but I believe it (except for the confiscation stuff) given I was shocked that Obama's EO's were pretty mild given the bluster going into them.
------------------------------------------------------
Like me you were probably watching the president’s gun control speech today. Was told this morning the presentation today was a revised version that was completed just last night after a bunch of back and forth between the White House and Senate leaders. Guessing that would be Harry Reid mostly. Last week the president was ready to go all in on the executive order scenario. Confiscation was going to be in play. Then the backlash came and it forced Obama to back off. He didn’t want to but after Reid said it was a no go, and the NRA was preparing to go to war with the White House, the president was given a revised script and that is what we heard this morning.

[Bklyn]

Yeah, the confiscation line is so ridiculous it makes me discount every other point in the blurb.

I'll wait to see what Woodward says.

[sardis]

"...and the NRA was preparing to go to war with the White House..."

Looks like the President was using little kids as human shields...

[hedge]

"and there should be no record of what kind of gun you are buying but whether you are competent enough to own one. You turn in your id, the gun guy calls in and gets a yes or no. Yes, I can sell you a gun, now what kind would you like? Thats the end of it. Whats all this bullshit about telling them what kind of gun I'm purchasing? As if that would have some say in the decision making process."

Insert picture of eCat brandishing his M-15....

Actually, that's pretty much why I am ambivalent about this issue. We've posted that pic of eCat multiple times, always for humorous effect. And we can do it in that way b/c I doubt there's anyone in here (certainly not me) who has any problem whatsoever with eCat owning that kind of gun or any other kind of gun. I'm just not worried about it at all, and even if I was, my little quantum of "worry" shouldn't form the basis for denying someone their constitutional right to bear arms.

Now then, if you get enough other quanta of worry together and have them vote based on that, then maybe the constitution changes. All "rights" are merely what the majority is willing to grant to themselves and the minority. It's like that with all laws, even if it does have to go thru the republican process of voting for lawmakers who you hope will make the laws you favor. But I realize (or should I say, I think I'm right in saying) that most gun owners are responsible, law-abiding citizens who pose very little threat to anyone. It's a quowndreh....

[Jungle Rat]

Politics make me laugh.

[Jungle Rat]

http://www.latimes.com/business/technol ... 0120.story

[innocentbystander]

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-01-16.html

[AlabamAlum]

From a couple of years back. ATF agent seizes airsoft guns; defends his action by saying an airsoft gun could be easily converted to a real automatic weapon.

Staggering stupidity.

[youtube]Y2sWiZ8BizI[/youtube]