Jump to content

Because Biden


nitflegal

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, rmgill said:

That's an argument that is present in US v Miller. but that case is very odd in that it was argued with only the prosecution and no defense. 
 

The Miller case was deliberately selected for no defense, they knew that the defendant was never going to be made to show.  In other words, it was a deliberate swindle to set precedent, it was tyranny by deception.  The swindling vermin do this all the time, giving a greasy sheen of legitimacy to their fuckery. 

When you have a system that rewards deceptive shystering, it's unsurprising that's what you get more of.  Back to dueling, back to honesty about power and what matters.  S/F....Ken M   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

5 hours ago, WRW said:

How many crimes have involved the use of ghost guns or braces?

Give it time, it's hard to manufacture these things when all you have to work with are noodle armed, skinnyfat soibois, bitchy blue haired land whales and 80IQ feral savages.  S/F....Ken M

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/10/2021 at 8:29 PM, DKTanker said:

States don't have 2A rights.  The 2A is a prohibition on government denying individuals of their right to KEEP and bear arms.  The 10th amendment grants to the states powers not reserved to the federal government nor prohibited to them by the constitution.  Couple that with the 2A affirming the individuals right to bear arms, without infringement, and you get the states raising their militias, National Guard units. 

FIFY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a far more productive discussion of the issues than I've seen for quite a long time. The interaction between the constitutional amendments is very interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a little surprised the NRA never attempted to repeal the 1935 Firearms Act. Because otherwise, they are admitting that the federal government can regulate weapons to some degree and are only splitting hairs about the details.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be cart before the horse. Also the NRA doesn't repeal, they can lobby for the repeal. It's seen as a bridge too far.

Getting NFA '34 off the books is complicated by GCA '68, FOPA '86, UFA '88, and BHVPA '93 and the whole host of state laws. 

Contextually speaking getting the 2nd Recognized in the first place was a necessary step (Heller).

Next, was 14th amendment incorporation (McDonald v Chicago). Because without a clear case asserting that the 14th amendment did in fact apply to the 2nd amendment and thus was a limit on the states as well, it effectively didn't. This view of 14th amendment incorporation is sort of like the idea that a new law isn't in force until the courts and state can effectively prosecute someone for that crime, until they do, it's not actually illegal. So you could argue in court that you didn't break the speed limit even though it's posted and on the books because you'd never been convicted for it there.  Except in this case, it would be the state asserting that a limit on it's power doesn't exist until it's told explicitly by the courts that it does. 🤔

Next is the scope of the 2nd amendment outside of the home and with Young v Hawaii and the 9th Circus' view that the 2nd amendment doesn't apply outside the home, we have the potential for a case before SCOTUS on that issue. Naturally when we look at the other rights like the right to protest or the right to free speech or freedom of religion, we have to presume that it is only in the home that those rights exist unless courts say otherwise. 🤨

Next would be a legal case covering what arms are protected by the second. We're not there yet. Heller and MacDonald's text/test of arms that are in common use is perhaps the groundwork for that. But then we also have Fed.Gov Attorneys who have already asserted that it would be reasonable to ban books and magazines so long as news papers were not banned (under what sort of reading of the 1st that comes from, I have no bloody clue). 

If you read Miller and have a sense of what sorts of shotguns were in use in the Trenches of WWI, you'd have a very clear understanding that short barreled shotguns WOULD be protected by the 2nd as would ANY militarily useful weapon. But the pro-control folks don't do that. 

The simple fact that NFA '34 was predicated on the taxing authority of Congress and since then we have Wikard v Filburn where the court rubber stamped the idea that the Federal Governments' Regulatory Authority over interstate commerce is unlimited (only scotched by US v Lopez and Printz v US which put a hard limit on Congress' ability to regulate firerams and behavior). Of course, even though the Supreme court specifically held in Lopez that even if Congress HAD findings that guns in schools was an interestate commerce isseue that it was too far a stretch, to extend police powers into every bit of the realm of things like guns in schools, Congress STILL re-authorized the law after that decision with 'findings'. I don't think it's been challenged but then I'm not sure if anyone has been charged under it either. 

There's lots of disingenuous behavior on the part of the Feds vis a vis the 2nd amendment. The simple fact that the BATF specifically violates the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 USC 522 in how they fail to adequately publish rule making changes is notable. https://www.ammoland.com/2020/12/atf-rules-capricious-arbitrary-political-and-stupid/#axzz6hThDzpkM
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Simon Tan said:

I'm hopeful the cities will all burn down before mid terms. 

I think a more reasonable person might simply hope for GOP victory in the midterms. I don’t see any burning happening on a large scale nor do I think the GOP will retake the Senate. The House will easily go GOP by a half dozen seats just with redistricting and probably more since the opposition historically almost has always gained in the midterms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Josh said:

I think a more reasonable person might simply hope for GOP victory in the midterms. I don’t see any burning happening on a large scale nor do I think the GOP will retake the Senate. The House will easily go GOP by a half dozen seats just with redistricting and probably more since the opposition historically almost has always gained in the midterms.

If one wishes to be charitable; the hope that the cities will burn is to drive home that the voting populace needs to have it get bad enough for it to be driven home that their votes are directly creating the situation by the policies that they support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That simply won’t happen under most any circumstances, because the social conservative baggage that comes with GOP fiscal conservatism is simply a bridge too far for younger generations. I’d also argue the GOP no longer is the party of fiscal conservatism and isn’t at all better equipped to solve urban problems at this point; all the talking points are strictly culture war and race replacement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Josh said:

. I don’t see any burning happening on a large scale nor do I think the GOP will retake the Senate. The House will easily go GOP by a half dozen seats just with redistricting and probably more since the opposition historically almost has always gained in the midterms.

Define Large Scale. Was last years 2 Billion in damages due to across the nation rioting large scale? For the Rodney King Riots it was mostly LA with an annex riot in Atlanta. With the 2020 riots it was across many major cities with some activity in smaller cities. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Josh said:

That simply won’t happen under most any circumstances, because the social conservative baggage that comes with GOP fiscal conservatism is simply a bridge too far for younger generations. I’d also argue the GOP no longer is the party of fiscal conservatism and isn’t at all better equipped to solve urban problems at this point; all the talking points are strictly culture war and race replacement.

Rampant lawlessness will drive people away from the party that says everything is fine while the riots continue. I've been making friends with people who HAVE been driven rightwards and red-pilled by the woke affectation with political violence and rampant crime being reasonable ways of redressing imbalance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Josh said:

That simply won’t happen under most any circumstances, because the social conservative baggage that comes with GOP fiscal conservatism is simply a bridge too far for younger generations. I’d also argue the GOP no longer is the party of fiscal conservatism and isn’t at all better equipped to solve urban problems at this point; all the talking points are strictly culture war and race replacement.

I would tend to agree, which is why I think much of the right has simply decided "sucks to be you" is their go-to response.  I'll be honest, I sympathize with that but I think it's just as foolish as not trying to outreach to inner city blacks and hispanics.  If you want votes from the population centers you'll need to engage in years of outreach and building relationships and it won't get any easier if we wait.  

If the Democrats normalizing destructive looting and property damage sprees on a nightly basis in many of our major cities isn't an entry point for that outreach then I don't know what would be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Josh said:

That simply won’t happen under most any circumstances, because the social conservative baggage that comes with GOP fiscal conservatism is simply a bridge too far for younger generations.

Thanks to the socialist indoctrination that masquerades as an education system . . . . 

Nevertheless, even the deluded can be led to wisdom when the wreckage piles high enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, nitflegal said:

I would tend to agree, which is why I think much of the right has simply decided "sucks to be you" is their go-to response.  I'll be honest, I sympathize with that but I think it's just as foolish as not trying to outreach to inner city blacks and hispanics.  If you want votes from the population centers you'll need to engage in years of outreach and building relationships and it won't get any easier if we wait. 

Judging by RNC recent gains in America's black and Latino communities, its clearly time to let go of the LW talking point of "no Republican outreach" and start talking about how to continue gaining ground. Why does the media keep pounding on the "no outreach" drum? Because they want the Rs to commit an unforced error.

IMHO, step 1 of the Repub Rennaissance needs to be a clear restatement of platform. Step 2 needs to be a comprehensive "stop playing to lose" mindset, which includes refusing to dance to the LW's monkey grinder.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Ivanhoe said:

Judging by RNC recent gains in America's black and Latino communities, its clearly time to let go of the LW talking point of "no Republican outreach" and start talking about how to continue gaining ground. Why does the media keep pounding on the "no outreach" drum? Because they want the Rs to commit an unforced error.

IMHO, step 1 of the Repub Rennaissance needs to be a clear restatement of platform. Step 2 needs to be a comprehensive "stop playing to lose" mindset, which includes refusing to dance to the LW's monkey grinder.

 

I disagree here.  I think Trump personally made that outreach a major theme and we had real gains because of it.  I think select elected officials have done some outreach.  I've been looking and where are organized GOP efforts to help rebuild the inner cities devastated by the riots?  Look at the official Republican platform for 2016/2020.  Four mentions of the term Africa in relation to the continent, not a single one calling out African Americans.  Type in Republican party platform and African American into Google or Duck Duck Go.  Nothing for multiple pages.  Outside of vague tide lifting all boats and some very lukewarm support for school choice can someone please tell me the official Republican position on bettering the lives of African Americans?  If I am asked by a black person in the city when I do volunteer job interview prep what do I tell them?  Where is my handout?  Where is the speech from anyone but Trump on the national scene? Democrats have splash pages for African Americans on their official website.

 

https://democrats.org/who-we-are/who-we-serve/african-americans/ 

 

here is the search string on the GOP website where the only thing in over a year is a single blog post about Trump adding two historical sites one about black music appreciation, and a year old post on what Trump did for them.  This is outreach?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, nitflegal said:

If one wishes to be charitable; the hope that the cities will burn is to drive home that the voting populace needs to have it get bad enough for it to be driven home that their votes are directly creating the situation by the policies that they support.

Biden's campaign manager fired the statistician that pointed out that the GOP wins after rioting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, nitflegal said:

 I'll be honest, I sympathize with that but I think it's just as foolish as not trying to outreach to inner city blacks and hispanics.  If you want votes from the population centers you'll need to engage in years of outreach and building relationships and it won't get any easier if we wait.  

What does this mean, out left the left?  Competing Santas?  That simply is not going to happen.  Something like the special farm subsidies to POC who can "prove" they've been in the agricultural industry for the last 180 days that the Left gifted them just two months ago?  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DKTanker said:

What does this mean, out left the left?  Competing Santas?  That simply is not going to happen.  Something like the special farm subsidies to POC who can "prove" they've been in the agricultural industry for the last 180 days that the Left gifted them just two months ago?  

 

Not in the least.  How about working through gun ownership for protection from rioters?  How about a platform of school choice to bail out of failing schools?  How about the Chamber of Commerce getting into the inner cities and working through how to open and sustain a business?  I've spent a decent chunk of time in some shitty inner city neighborhoods and while there are plenty of feral dirtbags there are an awful lot of people who want to escape, get a job, have a shot at a real life.  If the GOP could connect with 1 out of 10 potential new minority voters you'd break the Democrat party.

Go to a school committee meeting in Boston and see the raw seething anger that an awful lot of black and Hispanic parents have for what we've done to the schoolchildren in the last year.  Now explain to me why there isn't a Republican candidate at every single one of those describing how they will fight for school choice and charter schools for everyone so the teachers unions can never pull that crap with their kids ever again.  If the Republicans honestly believe that the majority of black and Hispanic voters actually only care about Santa then we may as well dissolve the party and start narcing out our families for woke credits.  Note that the minimal outreach that Trump did added percentage points to the minority voters.  Can anyone explain to me why more focused outreach on how jobs and educational opportunities and law and order would make things worse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, nitflegal said:

If the Democrats normalizing destructive looting and property damage sprees on a nightly basis in many of our major cities isn't an entry point for that outreach then I don't know what would be.

Well, they don't call it the Stupid Party for nothing.

As you noted, Trump managed real gains with minimal outreach.

--

Soren

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, nitflegal said:

How about working through gun ownership for protection from rioters?  How about a platform of school choice to bail out of failing schools?  How about the Chamber of Commerce getting into the inner cities and working through how to open and sustain a business?

A smart GOP would do all that. It might even decide to educate its candidates about the disastrous race related policy decisions of the Democrats over the past 100 years, just so that they are capable at fact-based comebacks in public debate rather than accepting by non-response the usual accusations of racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, rmgill said:

Define Large Scale. Was last years 2 Billion in damages due to across the nation rioting large scale? For the Rodney King Riots it was mostly LA with an annex riot in Atlanta. With the 2020 riots it was across many major cities with some activity in smaller cities. 

 

I think that absolutely can happen again, given another high profile police murder. But it would change little at the ballot box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...