Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS Ruling On Gun Restrictions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
    I know, my point is that he is MORE than a 'straw purchaser', I think he was intimately involved in the killings and, as he as stated to the FBI, an aborted earlier plan that HE was going to be involved with in 2012. So your not really a 'straw purchaser' when you're an actual participant, which I think he was. That is my point.

    I agree. His status is relevant, but I suspect that he still will be charged with a straw purchase even if they decide to charge him as a co-conspirator.

    Just my opinion on that point though.
    Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

    Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
      I agree. His status is relevant, but I suspect that he still will be charged with a straw purchase even if they decide to charge him as a co-conspirator.

      Just my opinion on that point though.
      I'm sure they will, but it will be one of those 'filler' charges. I think he needs 14 counts of murder by a terrorist act. If he continues 'singing' take the death penalty and life without parole in a Supermax off the table, but he still gets 50-60 years.
      “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
      “To talk of many things:
      Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
      Of cabbages—and kings—
      And why the sea is boiling hot—
      And whether pigs have wings.”
      ― Lewis Carroll

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
        I agree. His status is relevant, but I suspect that he still will be charged with a straw purchase even if they decide to charge him as a co-conspirator.

        Just my opinion on that point though.
        I agree it was a straw purchase under any circumstance.
        Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
          You also completely missed my point, but that is to be expected.
          At this point in the thread, you didn't state your point. This is why everyone but you misses your point until you finally articulate it after multiple strawman misdirects..........
          "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Nichols View Post
            At this point in the thread, you didn't state your point. This is why everyone but you misses your point until you finally articulate it after multiple strawman misdirects..........
            You were to busy arguing against a position I did not hold to notice it.
            “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
            “To talk of many things:
            Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
            Of cabbages—and kings—
            And why the sea is boiling hot—
            And whether pigs have wings.”
            ― Lewis Carroll

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Cambronnne View Post
              This will not be precedent. Precedent only applies to actual decisions from the SCOTUS. This is the absence of a decision from the SCOTUS.
              However, the lower Court's decision can be relied upon as precedent.

              Generally speaking, States and cities are permitted to impose reasonable "safety related" restrictions on handguns. The question becomes when the restrictions go beyond being merely safety related.
              This is why they can limit the magazine capacity, but cannot ban the magazine.

              Sorry, I should have been more clear in my post. I meant other cities using the Chicago suburb of Highland Park's local ordinance as precedent. According to the article in the OP, by the SCOTUS not hearing the appeal, they are giving lawmakers who want to restrict the sale of guns the green light to pursue it.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Nikki View Post
                Sorry, I should have been more clear in my post. I meant other cities using the Chicago suburb of Highland Park's local ordinance as precedent. According to the article in the OP, by the SCOTUS not hearing the appeal, they are giving lawmakers who want to restrict the sale of guns the green light to pursue it.

                I'm sorry. I should have recognized that.
                In that case, I think it will be precedent. The ordinance will be used as a model by other anti-gun municipalities when they draft their laws.
                Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                Comment


                • #38
                  "While they were originally sold legally, with magazine locking devices commonly known as bullet buttons, the rifles were subsequently altered in different ways to make them more powerful, according to Meredith Davis, a special agent with the ATF."
                  nitpicking i know....but removing a bullet button makes an AR "more powerful"?

                  must not take much knowledge to be an ATF spokesperson.
                  45B10 1986-91

                  Comment

                  Latest Topics

                  Collapse

                  Working...
                  X