- Joined
- May 19, 2005
- Messages
- 30,534
- Reaction score
- 10,717
- Location
- Louisiana
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Many of the perceptions liberals and conservatives have of each other is a result of the above. I don't think you will find an honest conservative that would say our actions only affect ourselves, however the main disagreements of government action versus personal responsibility get in the way. While I think most of us have good intentions we disagree over who needs to carry the burden. All this leads us to argue while the idiots in charge make things worse.I like your term. The concept is one I have professed for a long time. Ultimately, most folks couldn't care less about what happens unless it affects them and the inner circle in which they live. Unfortunately, what most folks don't realize is that we are all connected in some way, and what affects some, affects others... and so on. Humans by their very nature are self-focused, and though social beings, are not socially process oriented. What one gets out of things is often as far as one can see.
Overly simplistic.
Many of the perceptions liberals and conservatives have of each other is a result of the above. I don't think you will find an honest conservative that would say our actions only affect ourselves, however the main disagreements of government action versus personal responsibility get in the way. While I think most of us have good intentions we disagree over who needs to carry the burden. All this leads us to argue while the idiots in charge make things worse.
This is why, in jest, I often say, take all the extremists of each political lean, line them up against a wall and execute them, and then let the rest of us normal folk run the place.
Not if I am able to speak in full.
Those are different things. Those aren't prior restraint, they're just restraint. Assuming those regulations are constitutional, a background check to make sure someone meets them certainly is. It's simply verifying. If you're under 18 and can't vote yet, it's not prior restraint on the right to vote to check your ID beforehand, even if you're actually over 18.
Granted. It's a very handy term though.
Sheep aren't all that bright. They tend to engage in group-think. They tend to run whichever way the herd runs, even if they don't know why or if it is a good idea. They don't give much thought to anything beyond their herd, food, drink, and sex... and tend to take those for granted.
Seems to describe a lot of human beings.
False.No, you aren't restrained from buying a gun due to a background check, unless you fail it.
False.
You cannot exercise the right until you undergo the check, which is based on the premise that you might be breaking the law when trying to buy the gun. Once it is determined that you aren't dong anything illegal, you are allowed to buy the gun.
This is no different than preventing the publishing of a new story on the premise that it might contain slaner/libel, and then allowinf the publication after no libel/slander is found.
Thus, it is prior restraint.
Big assumption, as they are preconditions to a right not inherent to same, are not a compeling statre interest, and not the least restrictive means of achieving that interest.Those are different things. Those aren't prior restraint, they're just restraint. Assuming those regulations are constitutional...
Yes... but verifying your ID not the same thing as a background check.It's simply verifying. If you're under 18 and can't vote yet, it's not prior restraint on the right to vote to check your ID beforehand...
So? This does nothing to negate what I said; background checks are indeed a form of prior restraint.But there is no criminal law against libel or slander, nor can there be. There are criminal laws against gun posession by certain people.
Yes... but verifying your ID not the same thing as a background check.
No.,. its a verification that you are who you say you are, and nothing more. In no way does it make any determination that you arent trying to do something illegal.Pretty much. It's a verification that you are legally entitled to something.
No.,. its a verification that you are who you say you are, and nothing more. In no way does it make any determination that you arent trying to do something illegal.
No.... -that- is an extra step. That step is where prior restraint comes in, and background checks certainly fall under that.Right. It verifies that you are legally entitled to something.
No.... -that- is an extra step. That step is where prior restraint comes in, and background checks certainly fall under that.
The equivocation you're trying to argue here in no way negates the argument that background checks are a form or prior restraint.
Incorrect, for the reasons already noted.If so, so is checking your ID before you vote though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?