Sometimes, guns are fun.

[Rich2018]

I dare say there are also many illegals activities that criminals get "fun" from doing.

 

[humbolt]

No i presented what determines the constitutionality of a law


You are dismissed

Right, because nothing more firmly determines the constitutionality of law than:
"You dont get to determine what is unconstitutional and you dont speak for America."

 

[vegas giants]

Right, because nothing more firmly determines the constitutionality of law than:
"You dont get to determine what is unconstitutional and you dont speak for America."

Is a law on the books presumed constitutional?

 

[Antiwar]

Is there anything dumber than gun propenent logic?

* proponent!

 

[humbolt]

Is a law on the books presumed constitutional?

That depends on the law. Just because congress passes a law doesn't make it constitutional, and there are many, many examples of those that have failed to pass constitutional muster.

 

[vegas giants]

That depends on the law. Just because congress passes a law doesn't make it constitutional, and there are many, many examples of those that have failed to pass constitutional muster.

No you are wrong. They are all presumed constitutional until overturned


You are just unaware of the doctrine of presumed constitutionality.


Look it up and tell me then I am wrong

 

[Rich2018]

That depends on the law. Just because congress passes a law doesn't make it constitutional, and there are many, many examples of those that have failed to pass constitutional muster.

Yes it does

All laws that Congress passes (and are subsequently signed into law) are "constitutional", until ruled otherwise.

 

[RF667799]

Yes it does

All laws that Congress passes (and are subsequently signed into law) are "constitutional", until ruled otherwise.

How do you know they're not unconstitutional until ruled otherwise?

 

[Daddyo]

Guns are fun, sure. I plinked away hundreds of rounds of .22 long years ago and up to not long ago I hunted every season. Guns stop being fun when people say they need one out on the street for self-protection or to resist tyranny.

Agreed but then they switch from fun to necessary!

 

[Daddyo]

Speaking as a liberal...yes. And it is fun.

In fact, quite a few liberals indulge in the fun. Ask Rachael Madow: she likes to hunt...

That's not the issue liberals have: we are concerned about crime and safety concerning firearms. Not how much fun it is.

Crime and safety is the concern yet it is the liberal who refuses to hold actual criminals to account via tougher punishment. It is the liberal who institutes catch and release policies like "bail reform". It is the liberals soft on crime policies that has us at over 70 percent recidivists committing our current violent crime.

So if you truly want low crime and safety.........stop voting for democrats! That is the bottom line. Easy to solve at the ballot box if we were all on the same page. And only the criminals guns get taken.

 

[Rich2018]

Agreed but then they switch from fun to necessary!

Are guns only a necessity in the USA ?

If so why is that ?

 

[Rucker61]

Are guns only a necessity in the USA ?

If so why is that ?

Necessity is based upon situation. Can you ever foresee a time in which you might need a gun?

 

[Rich2018]

Necessity is based upon situation. Can you ever foresee a time in which you might need a gun?

How is the situation in the USA different than any other Westernized democracy ?

No.

 

[RF667799]

How is the situation in the USA different than any other Westernized democracy ?

No.

Then why did you claim to be looking to buy one?

 

[humbolt]

Yes it does

All laws that Congress passes (and are subsequently signed into law) are "constitutional", until ruled otherwise.

In the real world, that's clearly not true, or no law passed by Congress would ever be overturned. The SC generally does not consider the constitutionality of laws passed until a case is brought before them challenging constitutionality. Heller would be one example, among many.

And clearly Congress and other administrative entities within government play a lot of games around the fringes. So don't pretend to be so naive. Laws are passed and suits are filed challenging them - sometimes on the same day. It's the post-modern system we now have.

 

[Rich2018]

In the real world, that's clearly not true, or no law passed by Congress would ever be overturned.

No, in the real world it ***IS*** true
How about if Congress passes a law and the SC rule it as "unconstitutional" a year, 5 years or even 10 years later ?
During that period, is the law not "constitutional" ?

There are laws on the statute books that many people regard as "unconstitutional" - does that mean they are or are not ?
If you deem a law as "unconstitutional" and the SC rules that it is, in fact, "constitutional" - does that then alter your opinion of the law ?
In short, at what point does a law become "constitutional" ?

The SC generally does not consider the constitutionality of laws passed until a case is brought before them challenging constitutionality. Heller would be one example, among many.

So what ?

And clearly Congress and other administrative entities within government play a lot of games around the fringes. So don't pretend to be so naive. Laws are passed and suits are filed challenging them - sometimes on the same day. It's the post-modern system we now have.

And as I alluded to above, sometimes it's years.

 

[RF667799]

No, in the real world it ***IS*** true
How about if Congress passes a law and the SC rule it as "unconstitutional" a year, 5 years or even 10 years later ?
During that period, is the law not "constitutional" ?

There are laws on the statute books that many people regard as "unconstitutional" - does that mean they are or are not ?
If you deem a law as "unconstitutional" and the SC rules that it is, in fact, "constitutional" - does that then alter your opinion of the law ?
In short, at what point does a law become "constitutional" ?



So what ?



And as I alluded to above, sometimes it's years.

Again, within your convoluted semantic argument, why do you presume a law is constitutional until reviewed? Why not presume it is unconstitutional?

 

[Daddyo]

Nothing's wrong with that. The thing is that firearm crimes are mostly done by folks with guns against other folks with guns, with a dose of those who randomly start shooting people.

While there are stories of someone defending themselves with a firearm (good for them), that is not the majority of how gun crimes go down. When you live in rural Midwest, the odds of you needing that protection is low. When you are in a city like Baltimore...as an average citizen who is not a criminal...it actually isn't that much higher. If you have to use your firearm in Baltimore for self-protection its because you are in a place where you are buying or selling and are defending yourself from other drug dealers. NOT because you happen to be walking down the Inner Harbor.

Honestly, I personally don't mind CCW. But there comes a point when you are going to get laughed at by the criminals, the cops and the locals because you feel the need for protection when you go to the aquarium. It really is silly.

There are lots of things in life that we do to mitigate risks for events that are rare. Home fire insurance for example. Wearing a seat belt. Wearing a life preserver. Events that are relatively rare but could be catastrophic if they happen.

Carring a firearm for self defense is only slightly different. We are preparing for a rare BUT potentially catastrophic event. The difference being my decision to carry could save my life, my families life even YOUR families life.

As for the aquarium example.........#1 You, criminals, and the police will never know I'm carrying. Trust me if you find out I'm armed it will no longer be a laughing matter. It will switch to an "I told you so" event. While I won't be laughing at any unarmed victims, I will be quietly thinking I told you so.

Basically my preparation for a rare event bothers no one. It inconveniences no one. It endangers no one. It doesn't cost anyone a cent. All it seems to do is upset liberals and I for one believe it's because they are jealous.

 

[Daddyo]

I am not claiming a opinion

I am stating a fact


Still upset you lost an election? Lol

Upset? We didn't lose America lost! Why would that upset conservatives who love this country?

Liberals get upset when they lose elections because it means their quest for the fundamental transformation of this country into a socialist shit hole has been paused. We conservatives just get sad. You know it's sad to see the border crisis, inflation, the oil situation, the world falling into chaos and war because of precieved American weakness, covid losses despite all the advances available, and a president that makes the orange man look like a combination of genius and clairvoyant. We have a buffon (and this is being charitable) for a president, a moron (also being very charitable) for vice president, and a geriatric partisan airhead as speaker of the house........thats the top 3 most powerful people in our coutry. Awesome democrat representation. Yeah we are sad. Sad and embarrassed.

 

[Daddyo]

No idea what you mean by 'diversity experiment'. I just know I wouldn't raise a family somewhere where I need to be armed to be safe from the people around me. The day I found myself deciding to take a handgun with me downtown I'd put the house on the market and get the family packing up for a road trip.

You guys always claim that we prepare for a rare event so you wouldn't have to leave.

 

[yankintx]

No, seriously, they are. Have you ever chased a can or shot targets that react? No, not live targets, commie .Jesus. Shooting is fun. You need some instruction, and the right circumstance, but I'd be willing to bet I could get even AOC to like shooting.

I rather go to a museum, not much culture to be gained shooting empty beer cans. Not exactly a fun afternoon, but whatever.

 

[Daddyo]

Is there anything dumber than gun propenent logic?

Yes Liberal logic! Example they say we need more gun laws to protect the children yet rabidly support abortion. They cancel our oil pipeline while approving the Russian pipeline. They voted for a president who was openly displaying symptoms of dementia lol. It don't get no dumber than that.

 

[Daddyo]

This thread was started early this morning. The subway shooting was after that.

Sometimes threads just have bad timing.

Why? Because a violent liberal racist black guy shoots up a subway car filled with helpless victims while trying to start a race war?

What does a NY civilian do when he sees a man pull a gun and begin firing at innocents? Answer NOTHING because they are unarmed. Ask the same question of me and my family.

Guns are fun sometime AND NECESSARY OTHERS!

 

[Daddyo]

#1 Told you. I wouldn't live there if I thought I needed to be armed.
If, for some reason, I had to be in such a place yeah, I'd learn to use a handgun and be armed but be damned if I would live in such a place. It's no fit place to raise a family.

#2Why do you keep quoting Democrats? Tell me what you think.
I don't care what other people would do. Maybe if the situation deteriorates slowly and gradually enough it all seems acceptable. Maybe you take your pistol with you like I dress for the cold, just the way it has to be, but I wouldn't live in such a violent society any more than someone who grew up in Louisiana would live in the Yukon.

#3Gawd, you guys just can't resist equating cars and guns. You either need a gun or you don't. If you do, so does everyone else, right?

#1 So if you are unable to move for whatever reason, you would arm yourself? So we agree then. And many of these places are beautiful and just run by folks soft on crime.

#2 You keep saying you wouldn't live like that and that's fine however not all of us have the portability you apparently have. I am a business owner. Can't just repeat this everywhere. Some folks need to do like you said you would if you did have to live in one of those areas.

#3 I would carry a gun in your community. You wouldn't. I feel I need to and you don't. Why is it so hard to understand that just because you don't feel the need others might?

Comparison examples are accepted debate norms. Many dont like them because they often destroy ones arguments.

 

[Daddyo]

Right, because nothing more firmly determines the constitutionality of law than:
"You dont get to determine what is unconstitutional and you dont speak for America."

Humbolt is dismissed! That's some funny stuff right there lol.