(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

You also have to acknowledge that those muskets were exactly equivalent to what front line military troops had.

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

You also have to acknowledge that those muskets were exactly equivalent to what front line military troops had.

(10-25-2015 04:38 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

You also have to acknowledge that those muskets were exactly equivalent to what front line military troops had.

If you want to get picky they were actually superior accuracy wise to what the British were carrying.

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

now, now.... he's a liberal so that means he's a 2 faced hypocrite w/ a double standard. So of course, there's a complete difference between the 1st and 2nd amendments.

(10-25-2015 04:43 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 04:38 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

You also have to acknowledge that those muskets were exactly equivalent to what front line military troops had.

If you want to get picky they were actually superior accuracy wise to what the British were carrying.

I believe Tarleton, Ferguson and Cornwallis would agree.

(10-23-2015 04:04 PM)No Bull Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:15 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

Former San Francisco Mayor, current California Lieutenant Governor and likely future California Governor (and probable future presidential candidate) Gavin Newsom has this ONE WEIRD TRICK to render the Second Amendment toothless.

The Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms. So keep your arms, but what if we instead decided to regulate the BULLETS??? And he's proposing it as a ballot initiative, to skip the NRA-bought-and-paid-for legislators.

http://www.latimes.com/local/politics/la...olumn.html

Quote:Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom never has feared charging into a blazing barrage of bullets.

While taking on enemy fire, he attracts grateful allies. Many people initially question his wisdom but eventually wind up admiring the boldness.

Newsom is attacking again, this time challenging one of America's most dreaded political machines: the gun lobby.

"Risky? Sure it is," he told me. "These guys are exceptionally gifted at intimidation and bullying and are adept grass-roots organizers.

"But their home court is legislative chambers across the country. I think they're very vulnerable in public. They can intimidate the politicians, but I don't think they can intimidate the public."

Newsom, 48, who plans to run for governor in 2018, last week announced he'll lead a ballot initiative next year to significantly bolster California's already tough gun laws.

He proposes a statewide ban on possession — not just sales — of high-capacity ammunition magazines holding more than 10 rounds. San Francisco and the city of Los Angeles already have approved similar bans. Newsom also wants to require instant background checks — the first in the nation — for every ammunition purchase. After all, guns don't kill people. Bullets do.

There was an immediate response — you could call it semi-automatic — from Brandon Combs, president of the Firearms Policy Coalition: "If Gavin Newsom wants to declare war on law-abiding gun owners and 2nd Amendment rights, we're certainly going to bring the fight to him."

This guy is a fearless rising star. He'll take over for Jerry Brown and will be running against Julian Castro in 2024 for the Dem nomination.

he looks like a really sleazy used car salesman...

His Aunt is Nancy Pelosi. Nothing else needs to be said.

(10-26-2015 07:12 AM)South Carolina Duke Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 04:43 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 04:38 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

You also have to acknowledge that those muskets were exactly equivalent to what front line military troops had.

If you want to get picky they were actually superior accuracy wise to what the British were carrying.

I believe Tarleton, Ferguson and Cornwallis would agree.

I certainly know that Simon Fraser would!

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

(10-26-2015 10:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

We do?

So you have to have a permit to post your opinion on this and other message boards? You have to submit to a background check prior to purchasing a computer? Exactly how are you regulated on the internet Fit?

(10-26-2015 10:54 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

We do?

So you have to have a permit to post your opinion on this and other message boards? You have to submit to a background check prior to purchasing a computer? Exactly how are you regulated on the internet Fit?

The MODS won't let me tell you but boy let me tell you I am being regulated up the ying yang.

(10-26-2015 10:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

there are more than 20K gun laws on the books in America. How is that unregulated?

(10-26-2015 10:56 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:54 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-24-2015 02:44 PM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's remember for a second that the 2A was written with single shot muskets that one must spend 30 seconds to reload in mind, and when they wrote the word "arms" they couldn't even fathom machine guns or nuclear weapons. But originalism has its exceptions I guess.

If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

We do?

So you have to have a permit to post your opinion on this and other message boards? You have to submit to a background check prior to purchasing a computer? Exactly how are you regulated on the internet Fit?

The MODS won't let me tell you but boy let me tell you I am being regulated up the ying yang.

Doesn't matter what the moderators of a private message board do, how does the government regulate your internet usage? One would think that someone who claims to be an educator would understand that the First Amendment pertains to the government not private entities.

(10-26-2015 11:07 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:56 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:54 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-25-2015 02:58 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  If you are going to go that path then you have to acknowledge that the First Amendment was written with newspapers, pamphlets and the spoken word in mind, not radio, television, the internet, etc.

That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

We do?

So you have to have a permit to post your opinion on this and other message boards? You have to submit to a background check prior to purchasing a computer? Exactly how are you regulated on the internet Fit?

The MODS won't let me tell you but boy let me tell you I am being regulated up the ying yang.

Doesn't matter what the moderators of a private message board do, how does the government regulate your internet usage? One would think that someone who claims to be an educator would understand that the First Amendment pertains to the government not private entities.

Tell that to someone that yells "fire" in a theater.

(10-26-2015 11:16 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 11:07 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:56 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:54 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

We do?

So you have to have a permit to post your opinion on this and other message boards? You have to submit to a background check prior to purchasing a computer? Exactly how are you regulated on the internet Fit?

The MODS won't let me tell you but boy let me tell you I am being regulated up the ying yang.

Doesn't matter what the moderators of a private message board do, how does the government regulate your internet usage? One would think that someone who claims to be an educator would understand that the First Amendment pertains to the government not private entities.

Tell that to someone that yells "fire" in a theater.

This is you thus far in this thread





Like I told you last week.....troll smarter, not harder.

(10-26-2015 11:16 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 11:07 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:56 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:54 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 10:46 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  That is a fair assessment. We should then regulate radio, television, and the internet.

Oh wait. We already do.

We do?

So you have to have a permit to post your opinion on this and other message boards? You have to submit to a background check prior to purchasing a computer? Exactly how are you regulated on the internet Fit?

The MODS won't let me tell you but boy let me tell you I am being regulated up the ying yang.

Doesn't matter what the moderators of a private message board do, how does the government regulate your internet usage? One would think that someone who claims to be an educator would understand that the First Amendment pertains to the government not private entities.

Tell that to someone that yells "fire" in a theater.

You're not allowed to shoot someone in s theater either... Do you have a point?

Against he law to shoot anyone at a school as well.

(10-23-2015 10:33 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:20 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I want to say New York City tried it?.. and it went over like a lead balloon

And agreed VA... to "work around the US constitution"?

It's already on the books in Los Angeles and San Francisco. He's proposing taking it statewide.

It's unfortunate we need to work around it but SCOTUS' interpretation of the 2A leaves us no choice.

So the highest court in the land makes a ruling you don't like and it must be "worked around".

Glad to know whoever "us" is feels that it is okay to work around the constitution when it fits their agenda.

(10-26-2015 12:41 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:33 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:20 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I want to say New York City tried it?.. and it went over like a lead balloon

And agreed VA... to "work around the US constitution"?

It's already on the books in Los Angeles and San Francisco. He's proposing taking it statewide.

It's unfortunate we need to work around it but SCOTUS' interpretation of the 2A leaves us no choice.

So the highest court in the land makes a ruling you don't like and it must be "worked around".

Glad to know whoever "us" is feels that it is okay to work around the constitution when it fits their agenda.

Does that really surprise you? It is comical.

(10-26-2015 12:42 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-26-2015 12:41 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:33 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-23-2015 10:20 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  I want to say New York City tried it?.. and it went over like a lead balloon

And agreed VA... to "work around the US constitution"?

It's already on the books in Los Angeles and San Francisco. He's proposing taking it statewide.

It's unfortunate we need to work around it but SCOTUS' interpretation of the 2A leaves us no choice.

So the highest court in the land makes a ruling you don't like and it must be "worked around".

Glad to know whoever "us" is feels that it is okay to work around the constitution when it fits their agenda.

Does that really surprise you? It is comical.

Yet the same "us" bitched and moaned about the Constitutional questions regarding Obamacare. I think the quote was something along the lines of "It's the law of the land. IT's here to stay."