Triple G

You are really slow to the point of going backward. I have already said I support the Heller decision and I also support Scalia stating that the rights derived from the second amendment are not limitless. What's to argue about that? Are you so small that you can't admit that I'm correct according to SCOTUS cases? I asked the question about AKs and offered up Scalia's response. I've offered none of my beliefs, but in your broad brush name calling and 2nd grade playground scruffy talk, you want to start a fight.

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

dude, you are really one to be talking to other folks about being "small"..Isuppose there is a reason you are so fuyll of yourself but it certainly is not obvious to the rest of us..Why are you so condescending??? was it a part of your job???

Triple G

You set the tone of condescension and name calling. When you do that, you'll get return fire from me in the same tone. Try not to be such a dick sometime.

Wyantry Loc: SW Colorado

A series of decisions by the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) have been made in regards weapons and the Second Amendment, dating from the 1800’s.

Gun Rights Supreme Court Cases

“[The] Second Amendment has become one of the most contested provisions of the U.S. Constitution. Its full text states that “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” For most of its history, the Supreme Court addressed the Second Amendment only occasionally and in relatively narrow circumstances. This changed in 2008 when the Court reviewed a challenge to a handgun ban in the District of Columbia.

Writing the majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice Antonin Scalia rejected the argument that the Second Amendment protects only a right to possess and carry a firearm in connection with militia service. Instead, Scalia found that the Second Amendment supports an individual right to possess guns and to use them for traditionally lawful purposes. A series of Supreme Court decisions since Heller has reaffirmed this broad understanding of gun rights under the Constitution. As a result, legislatures seeking to pass gun control measures for public safety purposes have seen their options shrink sharply.

Below is a selection of Supreme Court cases involving gun rights, arranged from newest to oldest.”:

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen (2022). Author: Clarence Thomas
When the Second Amendment's plain text covers an individual's conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify a firearm regulation, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.

1. Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016). Author: Per Curiam
The Second Amendment extends to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding, and this Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the states.

2. McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010). Author: Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
The Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense. (In other words, the right is protected from state as well as federal interference.)

3. District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). Author: Antonin Scalia
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

4. Lewis v. U.S. (1980). Author: Harry Blackmun
Congress could rationally conclude that any felony conviction, even an allegedly invalid conviction, is a sufficient basis on which to prohibit the possession of a firearm.

5. U.S. v. Miller (1939). Author: James Clark McReynolds
In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a “shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length” at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, a court cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.{A short-barreled shotgun}.

6. Presser v. Illinois (1886). Author: William Burnham Woods
In view of the fact that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force of the national government, as well as in view of its general powers, the states cannot prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security. However, unless restrained by their own constitutions, state legislatures may enact statutes to control and regulate all organizations, drilling, and parading of military bodies and associations, except those that are authorized by the militia laws of the United States.

7. U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876). Author: Morrison R. Waite
The Second Amendment declares that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed, but this means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government.
(Emphasis added).
SOURCE: https://supreme.justia.com/cases-by-topic/gun-rights/

Decisions 1, 2, 3 and 6 are the most important from a citizen’s personal standpoint and clarify definitively the specifics of the Second Amendment.

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

you are really one to talk...got off your high horse ..try not to be such a dick ALWAYS

Triple G

You failed.

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

and you??? passed what??...certainly not humility!!! A Plus on arrogance and self importance

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Oh come on. Quite a number of you on the Left, pick your own violators, have set the tone of condescension for all the time I have been here in The Attic. You start crap and then wonder why Conservatives don't bend over and say Please. Do try to get over yourself and stop whining. Try to remember this IS The Attic. If you want moonbeams and cherry pie find another place to point out your feelings of inadequacy. In other words Man Up dudette.

Dennis

wilpharm Loc: Oklahoma

if you dont agree with her BS you are automatically a dick...go figure

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Well of course. She is on the Left side of political comments. One thing I have noticed is this: It used to be that both political parties had separate beliefs as far as how this country should be run. Sometimes the belief swayed to one side or the other but both parties pretty much believed in supporting the Capitalist system that has worked for over 200 years. We may not have always agreed but we all wanted a better America.

But since the Obama Reign of Terror where everybody who did not vote for that dipshit was a Racist the Left has literally attacked Conservatives both figuratively and in real life. The Left has applauded riots by minorities where police officers and civilians were murdered, Billions of dollars in damage done to America while the Left blamed everyone else but them but they were the ones who cheered it on. Left Wing city mayors told their police officers to stand down to allow the rioters to get it out of their system. Police officers were not supported and in fact were/are beaten up with mayors and district attorneys not supporting them.

Conservatives are relegated to Dregs of Society by President Biden and a Basket of Deplorables by Hillary Clinton. Obama called us Flat Earth's because we did not believe his ideas. Lying corrupt Left Wingers here in The Attic call Conservatives a Cult all because we do not go along with the Left ideas of turning America into a Socialist shithole. We are supposed to just go along with the anti American bullshit they propose such as giving up our 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms. Nobody is forcing any of those Left Wingers to buy firearms, to keep firearms in their homes or on their person but we are supposedly the bad guys because we choose to do so. Honest citizens are supposed to get rid of their firearms for the common good while convicted felons committing yet another felony by carrying a firearm have their charges dismissed. If the felons are Hispanic and are in the country illegally not only will no charges be filed but they will remain here, STILL illegal aliens and be released from custody. This is what the Left wants for all Americans. The thought process of the Left is to continue dividing the country into factions that are against each other.

Dennis

Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX

In review: many cogent well thought out presentations in favor of firearms in the hands of law abiding citizens.
Nothing similar from those apparently opposed.
And before you present any made up statistics, please ensure all events involving criminals or gangs etc have been removed from the data set. Case in point - firearms related 'child deaths' usually include ANYONE under age 18 INCLUDING miscreants shot by police OR by those they sought to rob - so all of those younger gang-bangers & criminals that are removed from the gene pool get counted.
A couple of cliches unabashedly presented:
When firearms are outlawed, only outlaws will have firearms.
When seconds count the cops are only minutes away.
Its better to carry one and not need it, than to need one and not have it.
'gun violence' = bull spit term invented by gun controllers. Inanimate firearms can't be violent, only people are.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

So much common sense and all lost on the Left.

Dennis

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

So that is where you lost your common sense.

Texcaster Loc: Queensland

Thoughts and prayers.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay