Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login
The John Byrne Forum
Byrne Robotics > The John Byrne Forum Page of 2 Next >>
Topic: Guns Over People Post ReplyPost New Topic
Author
Message
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 128347
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 1:17pm | IP Logged | 1 post reply

GOP Opposition to Bipartisan Gun Safety Measures
Back to Top profile | search
 
Conrad Teves
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 January 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 1914
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 1:31pm | IP Logged | 2 post reply

>>"As a Congressman it's my duty to pass laws that never infringe on the Constitution while protecting the lives of the innocent."<<

On the other hand, the Bible (as they choose to interpret it) trumps the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.

People like those Congressman are why we can't have reasonable gun control laws much less sensible ones.
Back to Top profile | search | www e-mail
 
John Byrne
Avatar
Imaginary X-Man

Joined: 11 May 2005
Posts: 128347
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 2:21pm | IP Logged | 3 post reply

As I have said many times, the Second Amendment neuters the rest of the document. It is impossible to fully secure Constitutional rights as long as somebody else can kill you.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Charles Valderrama
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 4442
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 3:27pm | IP Logged | 4 post reply

This Supreme Court is going to get people killed. LINK

-C!
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 3572
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 5:16pm | IP Logged | 5 post reply

These people from Ketchikan to St. Petersberg are all bent out of shape about drag queens doing library story hour yet see nothing faulty in every place being open carry for firearms! And just how does open carry work for anyone brown skinned or 'foreign' looking usually... a Native American was shot and killed in downtown Seattle because he was 'brandishing' a wood carving knife, a teenager was taken out in his Grandma's backyard because a cell phone looked like a gun, little boy in a park with toy, better call Swat! More guns = jumpier police, who are also now made to cover all the front-line mental health issues we collectively have simply dumped onto the streets for the most part.

I remember the fight, mostly lost, to have U.S. educational campuses as gun free zones... apparently designating even a kindergarten a no gun area is to blame for providing too enticing a target! I guess it's an experiment that has to be tried all the way? Guns-a-palooza beyond anything the romanticized 'wild' west ever knew? I wonder if there is a virus effecting human brains... probably been around for centuries but it seems to be flaring up worse lately. Oh shut up and believe in the Jesus, fall in line (or else we come down on you like a ton of bricks with insane name-calling and demonization) and it'll all be fine... or great... again.
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Jim Burdo
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 19 April 2020
Location: United States
Posts: 296
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 7:46pm | IP Logged | 6 post reply

There are already concealed carry permits in New York. LINK. It has nothing to do with open carry. Rebecca Jansen is wrong as usual. U.S. educational campuses are gun-free zones, it's just that mass murderers ignore them.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Brian Miller
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 29313
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 9:12pm | IP Logged | 7 post reply

Not all campuses are gun free. Its legal in Tennessee to carry on college
campuses, for example.
Back to Top profile | search
 
Tim O Neill
Byrne Robotics Security


Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10814
Posted: 23 June 2022 at 9:28pm | IP Logged | 8 post reply



Jim Burdo, do you support legislation restricting gun use, or do you think our
laws should remain or even be rolled back to give people free access to guns?



Back to Top profile | search
 
Rebecca Jansen
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 3572
Posted: 24 June 2022 at 1:02am | IP Logged | 9 post reply

I wrote that "I remember the fight, mostly lost, to have U.S. educational campuses as gun free zones..." speaking of mid-late '80s Washington state rights push against gun restrictions on university and college campuses and it sure felt like the gun free side was outnumbered and lost for the most part, but then there were intimations of violence if you spoke against the gun rights people and a lot of people became silent leaving a few exposed and out there with little support.... "apparently designating even a kindergarten a no gun area is to blame for providing too enticing a target". This refers to the present situation where I've often heard gun rights fanatics blaming such restrictions for encouraging attacks like Sandy Hook or Uvalde! Sorry I wasn't plainer about one statement referring to higher education campuses and another about elementary and below which have successfully in some cases been able to be gun free areas, and it's not wrong as my BF lived the first part personally in Washington state. I keep trying to be briefer and sometimes it's not really possible.

It sounds like everyone will have the right to enjoy the personal arms race for self-defense in more places than ever soon. Great... again?

Edited by Rebecca Jansen on 24 June 2022 at 1:04am
Back to Top profile | search | www
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 14594
Posted: 24 June 2022 at 2:12am | IP Logged | 10 post reply

 Jim Burdo wrote:
There are already concealed carry permits in New York. LINK. It has nothing to do with open carry. Rebecca Jansen is wrong as usual.



Yes, there are already concealed carry permits in New York.... Which is the whole crux of the Supreme Court ruling.

[As an aside, the link to 'disprove' Rebecca is to 'Moody Redhead' on Twitter, who writes: "WTF are you talking about? There were already concealed carry permits in NY". Can't we come up with more authoritative reference links than some random on Twitter?]

In summary, NY tried to regulate who could carried a conceal gun, applying a rule that to carry it outside the home, a license was required and the successful applicant for such a license would have to establish that proper cause existed for having the gun. This was challenged legally. The challenge made its way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the challenge.

On these facts I would like to think we agree.

You then opine that this has no bearing on open carry. Here we disagree.

The reason I feel this does have a bearing on open carry is because of the language of the majority opinion, drafted by Justice Thomas. He wrote, "The government must affirmatively prove its firearm regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to bear arms" and that "A State may not prevent law-abiding citizens from publicly carrying handguns because they have not demonstrated a special need for self-defense."

Now this sounds an awful lot to me like a hurdle is being raised for the government when it comes to gun regulation in any regard. His words did not talk specifically about concealed weapons. He talked about a constitutional right to carry a handgun without having to show any need for self-defense.

Maybe he was just sloppy and meant to put in concealed weapons? What do you think?


Edited by Peter Martin on 24 June 2022 at 2:19am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 14594
Posted: 24 June 2022 at 2:31am | IP Logged | 11 post reply

And to clarify, the rule that was challenged allowed everyone to get a license for a concealed gun in public as long as they were going hunting, or going to go to target practice or if needed for their job. If you wanted to carry the gun around for safety, though, rather than the prior stated reasons, then you needed to apply for an unrestricted license (and this is where NY State wanted the applicant to establish they had need of a gun for safety).

As the statement for the dissent notes: States have attempted to address public concern over gun violence by passing laws that limit who can carry firearms. This ruling severely burdens States' efforts to address the problem.


Edited by Peter Martin on 24 June 2022 at 2:32am
Back to Top profile | search
 
Peter Martin
Byrne Robotics Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 14594
Posted: 24 June 2022 at 2:43am | IP Logged | 12 post reply

Finally (and sorry to go on):

I think a really pertinent point is that Thomas -- taking a page out of Alito's playbook -- goes on at exhaustive length about statues from the antebellum, and English law from the 1200s on, and the understanding of the right to bear arms in 1791 and 1868. He wrote 69 pages to make his argument, with Alito, Kavanaugh and Barrett adding a further 14 pages in assent.

In these 83 pages the focus is almost entirely on history (conveniently choosing to ignore the numerous cases supporting the case for gun regulation) and failing to recognise any arguments for why gun regulation might be needed. 

The argument for the assent is basically: it doesn't matter how pressing the need is for gun regulation. Even if it was the most dangerous thing to all citizens, it still wouldn't matter. We are only going to look at past regulations and to hell with it if the world has changed.
Back to Top profile | search
 

Page of 2 Next >>
  Post ReplyPost New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 Active Topics | Member List | Search | Help | Register | Login