Strict scrutiny... 2A... Gunz... Liberty... in America?

Liberty? In America?

We need some regulations to free ourselves from all these choices.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/19/federal-appeals-court-overturns-ban-on-g

Yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled that the federal ban on gun possession by anyone who has ever been "committed to a mental institution" violates the Second Amendment. This seems to be the first time a federal appeals court has overturned any of the disqualifications for gun ownership imposed by the Gun Control Act of 1968. Notably, the court applied "strict scrutiny" to the law, which it deemed appropriate because "the Supreme Court has by now been clear and emphatic that the 'right to keep and bear arms' is a 'fundamental righ[t] necessary to our system of ordered liberty.'" But it suggested that the ban also would fail under "intermediate scrutiny," the standard preferred by most courts so far.

if you knew you could save a childs life by wearing a wrist watch..would you?

it would fail under intermediate scrutiny because it doesn't actually pertain to any govt interest. that's why 'strict scrutiny' trumps 'intermediate'

desert dude said:

Liberty? In America?

We need some regulations to free ourselves from all these choices.

http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/19/federal-appeals-court-overturns-ban-on-g
Yesterday the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit ruled that the federal ban on gun possession by anyone who has ever been "committed to a mental institution" violates the Second Amendment. This seems to be the first time a federal appeals court has overturned any of the disqualifications for gun ownership imposed by the Gun Control Act of 1968. Notably, the court applied "strict scrutiny" to the law, which it deemed appropriate because "the Supreme Court has by now been clear and emphatic that the 'right to keep and bear arms' is a 'fundamental righ[t] necessary to our system of ordered liberty.'" But it suggested that the ban also would fail under "intermediate scrutiny," the standard preferred by most courts so far.

Click to expand...

i agree..what are you complaining about?

the ban was overturned..

it's generally accepted that mentally unstable people running around with guns is a bad idea. but strict scrutiny is the courts way of saying 'pontuis pilot'. we didn't make the rules we just uphold them

schuylaar said:

if you knew you could save a childs life by wearing a wrist watch..would you?

Click to expand...

if you thin that shitty $2100 pea shooter 22 pistol is the gun for you, then they have found their target market.
go buy some.

if you think that little pop gun is gonna satisfy my needs then youre a fool.

if you think you can mandate that only worthless overpriced kids toys are allowed then youre delusional.

i got my first 22 pistol when i was 10, still got it too.

when foiols who dont know dick about a subject (like in this case, guns) try to mandate policies and craft laws, they just wind up making themselves look stupid.

if you could save one child's life by shooting a kidnapper, would you?
no you wouldnt cuz your watch didnt go with those shoes.

so sad.

that little girl gets to receive the Full Padawanbater treatment in the back of a windowless panel van cuz your pistol failed to operate

pontius pilot's freind Biggus Dickus would disagree with your calumny.

schuylaar said:

i agree..what are you complaining about?

the ban was overturned..

Click to expand...

Why do you think he was complaining?
What words did he use to show contempt? Liberty? America? which one?
I think you have already subconsciously categorized him as a adversary on many subjects, so you are still doing it, something you claimed you didn't do.

NoDrama said:

Why do you think he was complaining?
What words did he use to show contempt? Liberty? America? which one?
I think you have already subconsciously categorized him as a adversary on many subjects, so you are still doing it, something you claimed you didn't do.

Click to expand...

drama..you seem out of sorts today..what's wrong?

cows not milking again?

Dr Kynes said:

if you thin that shitty $2100 pea shooter 22 pistol is the gun for you, then they have found their target market.
go buy some.

if you think that little pop gun is gonna satisfy my needs then youre a fool.

if you think you can mandate that only worthless overpriced kids toys are allowed then youre delusional.

i got my first 22 pistol when i was 10, still got it too.

when foiols who dont know dick about a subject (like in this case, guns) try to mandate policies and craft laws, they just wind up making themselves look stupid.

if you could save one child's life by shooting a kidnapper, would you?
no you wouldnt cuz your watch didnt go with those shoes.

so sad.

that little girl gets to receive the Full Padawanbater treatment in the back of a windowless panel van cuz your pistol failed to operate

Click to expand...

but you see dear kynes, it's a proven fact that those walking around with guns to "thwart" do anything but and often times end up dead themselves..look at the las vegas cop killer couple at wal-mart..do i have to draw you a diagram?

schuylaar said:

if you knew you could save a childs life by wearing a wrist watch..would you?

Click to expand...

Lol.

'Let's do it for the children! '

Dr Kynes said:

ORLY?
google citizen shoots robber

theres hundreds.

i have used a firearm in self defense myself.
you are full of shit.

Click to expand...

here you go; read it and weep..they did a meta-study..meta

http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/the-self-defense-self-delusion/

schuylaar said:

here you go; read it and weep..they did a meta-study..meta

http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/the-self-defense-self-delusion/

Click to expand...

Yes but in that study random people were given a gun in a classroom setting and the shooter that came in already knew who had the gun.

whitebb2727 said:

Yes but in that study random people were given a gun in a classroom setting and the shooter that came in already knew who had the gun.

Click to expand...

Sounds "scientific".

I will go as far as to say that the average untrained person does not need to carry.
I can guarantee that people like my self and probably dr kynes that do carry put lots of lead down range.
If I had to pull mine it is mechanical smooth action from practice and muscle memory.
Second nature.

schuylaar said:

if you knew you could save a childs life by wearing a wrist watch..would you?

Click to expand...

Batman: Quick, Desert Dude, what time is it?
Desert Dude: It's 5:43
Batman: Thank God you were wearing that watch. This poor child would have died if we didn't know what time it was.

Dr Kynes said:

if you think that little pop gun is gonna satisfy my needs then youre a fool.

Click to expand...

really?

how many random black people do you need to shoot in a given day?

UncleBuck said:

really?

how many random black people do you need to shoot in a given day?

Click to expand...

As usual, confusing quantity and quality.

god1 said:

As usual, confusing quantity and quality.

Click to expand...

so you're saying that kkkynes can't get the quality of kill he so desires, nay NEEDS, with that gun?

schuylaar said:

here you go; read it and weep..they did a meta-study..meta

http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/the-self-defense-self-delusion/

Click to expand...

I have a wager for you.
I will spend a day taking lectures, classes, what ever you deem fit to convince me about the negatives of guns.

But on the flip side you would have to spend a day learning about guns.
And yes shoot them. Maybe take a hunters safety education course. In Ky you are required to shoot in front of an instructor. You have to have the card to legally hunt.