9th Circuit just ruled that there is “no right” to carry a firearm

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    it is not really about poorly argued or not, or the intent of the constitution -- it is about poltical views of the federal justices. That is where gun control cases align and to deny it is denial of the record and the clear partisan alignment of judges on almost all on gun control.

    These cases are NOT decided by argument, or merit, but by poltical outcomes of numbers of appoints by winners of presidential elections.

    If that is the case why did we lose this case. There were 6 republican appointed judges and 5 democrat appointed judges.

    Why has SCOTUS not granted more 2A cases, the Court has been majority republican appointed since Heller? Why did they per curiam Caetano, which required at least one democrat appointed justice to vote for it? Why did they vote to hear the NYSRPA case, yet turn around and dismiss it as moot. Why did they deny all 10 cases they held during the NYSRPA case?

    I think the answer is obvious, it really is about the arguments.
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,690
    If that is the case why did we lose this case. There were 6 republican appointed judges and 5 democrat appointed judges.

    Why has SCOTUS not granted more 2A cases, the Court has been majority republican appointed since Heller? Why did they per curiam Caetano, which required at least one democrat appointed justice to vote for it? Why did they vote to hear the NYSRPA case, yet turn around and dismiss it as moot. Why did they deny all 10 cases they held during the NYSRPA case?

    I think the answer is obvious, it really is about the arguments.

    You have a lot more faith in the rationality of decisions than might be justified by circumstances.

    I strongly suspect that the judiciary is very aware of the civil unrest loose in the Republic, and will act to appease the more violent factions. That doesn't play well with those who have a naive trust in the rule of law, and who believe that the COTUS is effectively the primary law of the land.

    It is obvious that appeasement is never a good substitute for directly confronting the root of a problem; it merely enables the more violent to successfully intimidate everyone else, while kicking the can down the road in hopes that someone else will solve the problem. It works in bureaucracies, but not so well in real life.

    Of course, there's little correlation between the law and real life, wishful thinking aside.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    If that is the case why did we lose this case. There were 6 republican appointed judges and 5 democrat appointed judges.

    Why has SCOTUS not granted more 2A cases, the Court has been majority republican appointed since Heller? Why did they per curiam Caetano, which required at least one democrat appointed justice to vote for it? Why did they vote to hear the NYSRPA case, yet turn around and dismiss it as moot. Why did they deny all 10 cases they held during the NYSRPA case?

    I think the answer is obvious, it really is about the arguments.

    While nothing is a guarantee of course, the GOP nominees pre Trump are products of blue slips. So Bybee and Clifton being from Dem states needed to be approved by their state senators. So we get an idea now of why they were approved.
     

    N3YMY

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 21, 2013
    2,763
    We are not at the point where both parties see each other as enemies.

    I respectfully disagree.

    I can’t count the number of “friends” I have lost since T45’s election. From where I’m sitting, it appears that the polarization is mostly rural vs *urban.

    The friends I have and still can discuss items with (whether they agree or not) are from rural areas.

    In the end, it feels as if the CW ][, Cold Edition has already begun...
     

    babalou

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 12, 2013
    16,017
    Glenelg
    this right here

    You have a lot more faith in the rationality of decisions than might be justified by circumstances.

    I strongly suspect that the judiciary is very aware of the civil unrest loose in the Republic, and will act to appease the more violent factions. That doesn't play well with those who have a naive trust in the rule of law, and who believe that the COTUS is effectively the primary law of the land.

    It is obvious that appeasement is never a good substitute for directly confronting the root of a problem; it merely enables the more violent to successfully intimidate everyone else, while kicking the can down the road in hopes that someone else will solve the problem. It works in bureaucracies, but not so well in real life.

    Of course, there's little correlation between the law and real life, wishful thinking aside.


    Agree 100%. Hence, the recent rulings over the election and other things. Scared to do rule of law due to being afraid of the consequences of the Blantifa fodder and Dems.
     

    Allen65

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 29, 2013
    7,063
    Anne Arundel County
    I can’t count the number of “friends” I have lost since T45’s election. From where I’m sitting, it appears that the polarization is mostly rural vs *urban.

    That pretty much sums it up. And it puts those of us living in rural/agricultural enclaves adjacent to large urban areas smack dab in the middle of the fight.
     

    babalou

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 12, 2013
    16,017
    Glenelg
    funny, too

    I respectfully disagree.

    I can’t count the number of “friends” I have lost since T45’s election. From where I’m sitting, it appears that the polarization is mostly rural vs *urban.

    The friends I have and still can discuss items with (whether they agree or not) are from rural areas.

    In the end, it feels as if the CW ][, Cold Edition has already begun...

    Seems to be more from the other side than our side. We are in their way.
     

    N3YMY

    Ultimate Member
    Jan 21, 2013
    2,763

    Attachments

    • EF4A7A91-FE7A-4A5B-9E28-4493012CEC14.jpeg
      EF4A7A91-FE7A-4A5B-9E28-4493012CEC14.jpeg
      7.5 KB · Views: 246
    Its not going to matter. Just wait until Schumer and the lefttards in the Senate decide to go nuclear and only require a simple majority to pass ANYTHING...And when the court challenges start rolling in they stack SCOTUS so nothing gets overturned...

    Yeah, I know...hyperbole..until it happens..
     

    fred55

    Senior
    Aug 24, 2016
    1,772
    Spotsylvania Co. VA
    Its not going to matter. Just wait until Schumer and the lefttards in the Senate decide to go nuclear and only require a simple majority to pass ANYTHING...And when the court challenges start rolling in they stack SCOTUS so nothing gets overturned...

    Yeah, I know...hyperbole..until it happens..

    That certainly fits the plans and actions of the Democrats/Socialists. fred55
     

    boatbod

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 30, 2007
    3,827
    Talbot Co
    Its not going to matter. Just wait until Schumer and the lefttards in the Senate decide to go nuclear and only require a simple majority to pass ANYTHING...And when the court challenges start rolling in they stack SCOTUS so nothing gets overturned...

    Yeah, I know...hyperbole..until it happens..

    Let 2A be the catalyst for the Dems eliminating the filibuster. It'll come back to bite them in the ass and then some. Got my doubts about compliance with any serious gun ban anyway...
     
    Let 2A be the catalyst for the Dems eliminating the filibuster. It'll come back to bite them in the ass and then some. Got my doubts about compliance with any serious gun ban anyway...


    I agree....until they weaponize the IRS...

    If you fail to comply they will simply order your employer to withhold your pay, put a lien on your bank holdings and literally try to starve you into submission.

    Again...I know...crazy conspiracy theory...until it happens..
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    You have a lot more faith in the rationality of decisions than might be justified by circumstances.

    I strongly suspect that the judiciary is very aware of the civil unrest loose in the Republic, and will act to appease the more violent factions. That doesn't play well with those who have a naive trust in the rule of law, and who believe that the COTUS is effectively the primary law of the land.

    It is obvious that appeasement is never a good substitute for directly confronting the root of a problem; it merely enables the more violent to successfully intimidate everyone else, while kicking the can down the road in hopes that someone else will solve the problem. It works in bureaucracies, but not so well in real life.

    Of course, there's little correlation between the law and real life, wishful thinking aside.

    The Constitution only has meaning if it is backed up by the rule of law. If you can't trust the law what is the point of the COTUS, it is simply the supreme law of the land.

    The reason that I have faith is that I read and understand the reasoning behind the decisions. I think this opinion brings to the surface the main reason why we keep losing. It is about the government police powers to protect society being stronger than your rights. Arguing to the right is not going to win. The 2A is ultimately how society protects itself, but you never hear that because it is all about the individual. The problem is that the arguments that our side makes address the wrong things.
     

    jcutonilli

    Ultimate Member
    Mar 28, 2013
    2,474
    While nothing is a guarantee of course, the GOP nominees pre Trump are products of blue slips. So Bybee and Clifton being from Dem states needed to be approved by their state senators. So we get an idea now of why they were approved.

    There was one Reagan appointee, 4 W appointees, and 1 Trump appointee. If the issue is blue slips why wasn't the vote 10-1? Three other judges were appointed by blue slips also.
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,690
    The Constitution only has meaning if it is backed up by the rule of law. If you can't trust the law what is the point of the COTUS, it is simply the supreme law of the land.

    The reason that I have faith is that I read and understand the reasoning behind the decisions. I think this opinion brings to the surface the main reason why we keep losing. It is about the government police powers to protect society being stronger than your rights. Arguing to the right is not going to win. The 2A is ultimately how society protects itself, but you never hear that because it is all about the individual. The problem is that the arguments that our side makes address the wrong things.

    It's not the law I distrust, it's those who fail to adhere to it in the justice system.

    We're approaching the point where arguments become pointless, as those who are appointed to serve the law prefer to serve another master.
     

    Inigoes

    Head'n for the hills
    MDS Supporter
    Dec 21, 2008
    49,361
    SoMD / West PA
    Its not going to matter. Just wait until Schumer and the lefttards in the Senate decide to go nuclear and only require a simple majority to pass ANYTHING...And when the court challenges start rolling in they stack SCOTUS so nothing gets overturned...

    Yeah, I know...hyperbole..until it happens..

    That would be the spark that ignites the powder keg.

    If the 2/3rds requirement laid out in the constitution is over ruled by a silly Senate say so, then this country is done. The constitution will mean nothing, and the oaths sworn to uphold it are worthless.
     

    boatbod

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 30, 2007
    3,827
    Talbot Co
    I agree....until they weaponize the IRS...

    If you fail to comply they will simply order your employer to withhold your pay, put a lien on your bank holdings and literally try to starve you into submission.

    Again...I know...crazy conspiracy theory...until it happens..

    The only people who will starve are those that are so clueless about life that they cannot help themselves.
     

    press1280

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 11, 2010
    7,878
    WV
    There was one Reagan appointee, 4 W appointees, and 1 Trump appointee. If the issue is blue slips why wasn't the vote 10-1? Three other judges were appointed by blue slips also.

    That's why I said no guarantees. A CA or HI judge appointed by W with the blue slips makes it more likely they side with the government on this issue.

    Not sure what 3 other judges you're referring to. If they're Dem nominees from Dem states it's highly unlikely their state senators would block them.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,921
    Messages
    7,258,981
    Members
    33,349
    Latest member
    christian04

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom