Jump to content
Xchief30

Which new SC Justice will help with our gun laws ??

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

Yes, I did, licensing and training before for concealed carry purposes. I see no issue with that, isn't that what most shall issue states do?

Well, them we different opinions on the subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is exactly what I see, he said Heller should not be re-litigated and taken at face value, and that the Heller decision for semi-auto handguns should be applied to semi-auto rifles.
We are reading the same thing and see different things. I understand that you have hated Trump for a long time and are looking to find what he has done wrong. But he has not done anything wrong in this case in my opinion, and your opinion varies, I understand. But nothing in any of the mentioned text, tells me anything other then he is Pr-2A and will only be beneficial to us, maybe not as beneficial as others but beneficial none the less.
Kavanaugh said machine gun ban is ok.

Laws restricting not common use firearms is ok.

Laws restricting magazines is ok if the commons use is say 10 rounds.

Laws requiring licensing and testing to carry is ok.

Maybe you are ok with those bans. I am not.


Hardiman said NJ carry not ok. Hardiman said taking away gun rights for non violent felons is not ok.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's no doubt in my mind that Hardiman would have been better for 2A. Kavanaugh sounds like a bit of a squish on 2A, but he pro-2A enough that he's likely no worse than Kennedy. I, too, am struggling with his idea of "tradition" - whether he's referring to countrywide or within a state. It sounds like he was saying DC's laws were extreme as compared to the rest of the country (as MartyZ is arguing). Would he also hold that NY, NJ, CA's were "extreme" and should be tossed - or would he then be arguing, "yeah, but those laws are longstanding and traditional within those states, so we're not going to overturn them?" That's not 100 percent clear to me after reading all these articles.

I think the court likely did not move forward appreciably (if at all) on 2A issues with this nomination. But we probably didn't lose ground either. I'm not surprised by that.... it's not like this nomination is replacing one of the liberal Supremes.... this nomination never had the capacity to be seriously game-changing IMO based on Kennedy's prior 2A votes! 

BTW, nor do I think Trump is any kind of "yuge" 2A champion (I think his son is, but not him). He's just playing to his base. If we happen to get one of the liberal justices replaced, that could be a game-changer... but even then I think it would be almost a happy by-product of Trump choosing a justice from that same list who respects the Constitution, not because Trump really cares all that much about 2A. That's OK - I could live with that. I don't ever hope for people's demise...so let's hope for a retirement or two! RBG, etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I did, licensing and training before for concealed carry purposes. I see no issue with that, isn't that what most shall issue states do?
Ok so you aren't a Constitutionalist. Why not just say that

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

That is exactly what I see, he said Heller should not be re-litigated and taken at face value, and that the Heller decision for semi-auto handguns should be applied to semi-auto rifles.

We are reading the same thing and see different things. I understand that you have hated Trump for a long time and are looking to find what he has done wrong. But he has not done anything wrong in this case in my opinion, and your opinion varies, I understand. But nothing in any of the mentioned text, tells me anything other then he is Pr-2A and will only be beneficial to us, maybe not as beneficial as others but beneficial none the less.

In this, we agree.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There's no doubt in my mind that Hardiman would have been better for 2A. Kavanaugh sounds like a bit of a squish on 2A, but he pro-2A enough that he's likely no worse than Kennedy. I, too, am struggling with his idea of "tradition" - whether he's referring to countrywide or within a state. It sounds like he was saying DC's laws were extreme as compared to the rest of the country (as MartyZ is arguing). Would he also hold that NY, NJ, CA's were "extreme" and should be tossed - or would he then be arguing, "yeah, but those laws are longstanding and traditional within those states, so we're not going to overturn them?" That's not 100 percent clear to me after reading all these articles.
I think the court likely did not move forward appreciably (if at all) on 2A issues with this nomination. But we probably didn't lose ground either. I'm not surprised by that.... it's not like this nomination is replacing one of the liberal Supremes.... this nomination never had the capacity to be seriously game-changing IMO based on Kennedy's prior 2A votes! 
BTW, nor do I think Trump is any kind of "yuge" 2A champion (I think his son is, but not him). He's just playing to his base. If we happen to get one of the liberal justices replaced, that could be a game-changer... but even then I think it would be almost a happy by-product of Trump choosing a justice from that same list who respects the Constitution, not because Trump really cares all that much about 2A. That's OK - I could live with that. I don't ever hope for people's demise...so let's hope for a retirement or two! RBG, etc.
I said basically what you did but not as nice. We got Kennedy 2.0 not Thomas' equal.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, capt14k said:

Ok so you aren't a Constitutionalist. Why not just say that

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

I never said I was not a constitutionlist. I said I was ok with licensing and training for CCW purposes, Only, as long as it's shall issue. I'm sure that most on here would agree that training is not a bad thing when carrying, might just prevent someone from blowing off their own toes, or something more important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, capt14k said:

I said basically what you did but not as nice. We got Kennedy 2.0 not Thomas' equal.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

You mean... I have a gentler touch? LOL.

But, yeah, I agree with the gist of what you're saying (but sheesh, without all the fire and brimstone, of course, LOL). But I think it would serve you well to focus on the "reality" - replacement of one of the LIBERAL judges is when the real impact will take place. And, there's still time for that. Have a cup of tea, relax! There's much more to come from this administration, I'm sure. Stacking these courts (SCOTUS and the other Federal courts) is a long game - we're just at the start of it and he's already done a LOT of re-shaping with nominations of YOUNG judges that will impact for many years. Patience is a virtue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I never said I was not a constitutionlist. I said I was ok with licensing and training for CCW purposes, Only, as long as it's shall issue. I'm sure that most on here would agree that training is not a bad thing when carrying, might just prevent someone from blowing off their own toes, or something more important.
I guess I should have used originalist. Meaning there is nothing about licensing in 2A.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You mean... I have a gentler touch? LOL.
But, yeah, I agree with the gist of what you're saying (but sheesh, without all the fire and brimstone, of course, LOL). But I think it would serve you well to focus on the "reality" - replacement of one of the LIBERAL judges is when the real impact will take place. And, there's still time for that. Have a cup of tea, relax! There's much more to come from this administration, I'm sure. Stacking these courts (SCOTUS and the other Federal courts) is a long game - we're just at the start of it and he's already done a LOT of re-shaping with nominations of YOUNG judges that will impact for many years. Patience is a virtue. 
I don't like the trend. First Bennett to 9th then Kavanaugh to SCOTUS. I really fear Garland would be his pick to replace RBG. I fear even more the RINOS would confirm him like they are going to do with Bennett.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come the Trump can do no wrong crowd hasn't touched his nominee Mark Bennett to the 9th Circuit?? Cat got your tongues? Is it possible Trump isn't the big 2A Supporter many think he is?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, capt14k said:

How come the Trump can do no wrong crowd hasn't touched his nominee Mark Bennett to the 9th Circuit?? Cat got your tongues? Is it possible Trump isn't the big 2A Supporter many think he is?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

I can't speak for anyone else but I am NOT in the Trump can't do no wrong crowd. I guess after 8 years of Obama, most things Trump does, for now at least, is acceptable, in my view. Basically what I am saying is that he has not yet done anything egregious enough to piss me off. But I do have a pretty long fuse, which could be a negative I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, capt14k said:

I don't like the trend. First Bennett to 9th then Kavanaugh to SCOTUS. I really fear Garland would be his pick to replace RBG. I fear even more the RINOS would confirm him like they are going to do with Bennett.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
 

I don't like the Bennett pick  either - that said, it's to a heavily anti-2A and generally wingnut court (the 9th) that had NO CHANCE IN HELL (IMO) of going pro-2A ever during our lifetime.

So, that begs the question... did he just "throw a bone" to the Dems with that nomination (on a situation that was already a clear loser), just to be able to leverage it later? I don't know. But, I'm not ready to call these 2 nominations a "trend". Too early. Again make yourself a cup of tea. Chamomile. Steady on!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't speak for anyone else but I am NOT in the Trump can't do no wrong crowd. I guess after 8 years of Obama, most things Trump does, for now at least, is acceptable, in my view. Basically what I am saying is that he has not yet done anything egregious enough to piss me off. But I do have a pretty long fuse, which could be a negative I agree.

 

No I don't believe you are. Those Always Trumpers get mad and bent out of shape at the mere mention that Trump screwed up.

 

 

I agree better than Obama and better than Hillary, but not what we were promised. Swamp not drained, 2A not restored, Obamacare not replaced by Association Healthplans across State Lines, Budget not balanced (in fact just the opposite). Wars still on going.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I don't like the Bennett pick  either - that said, it's to a heavily anti-2A and generally wingnut court (the 9th) that had NO CHANCE IN HELL (IMO) of going pro-2A ever during our lifetime.

So, that begs the question... did he just "throw a bone" to the Dems with that nomination (on a situation that was already a clear loser), just to be able to leverage it later? I don't know. But, I'm not ready to call these 2 nominations a "trend". Too early. Again make yourself a cup of tea. Chamomile. Steady on!

 

 

Actually it does if Bennett isn't confirmed, and replaced by Pro 2A pick. Right now there are 16 Dem Nominees one is retiring. There are 6 GOP. There are 29 spots. Trump can fill 8. Making it 15-14. One more Dem retires and it is GOP majority.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It would do what? Sorry, I didn't understand. Are you saying a 2A nominee being confirmed would push that court to a pro-2A majority? (I've only read a little bit about the situation).


See edit above


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, capt14k said:

See edit above

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Hmmm... OK, then definitely a bad pick based on flawed strategy.

But again, the 2A is not actually all that high on Trump's list - I think you and I happen to agree on that. The 2A will move forward more by "accident" than by some grand scheme from the Trump admin. If he keeps appointing conservative judges to all these various courts (people who won't legislate from the bench), the 2A will be strengthened almost by default. Though I'd prefer a more thoughtful, strategic approach, I'll still take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm... OK, then definitely a bad pick based on flawed strategy.
But again, the 2A is not actually all that high on Trump's list - I think you and I happen to agree on that. The 2A will move forward more by "accident" than by some grand scheme from the Trump admin. If he keeps appointing conservative judges to all these various courts (people who won't legislate from the bench), the 2A will be strengthened almost by default. Though I'd prefer a more thoughtful, strategic approach, I'll still take it.


Though Trump did campaign on being strong Pro 2A. Like a dummy I actually believed him. Others still do or they make excuses for his lies. I believe you never did believe him. You were right. I was wrong. So if we are going to have a lying POTUS might as well have a proven strong Conservative like Cruz or Pence who are both strong Pro 2A.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

 I'm sure that most on here would agree that training is not a bad thing when carrying, might just prevent someone from blowing off their own toes, or something more important.

Training is a good idea yes but mandated by the state no...

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, carl_g said:

Training is a good idea yes but mandated by the state no...

That is a good point, state should not mandate training. And if they do it should only be basic gun safety and not something that will cost an arm and a leg.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

There's no doubt in my mind that Hardiman would have been better for 2A. Kavanaugh sounds like a bit of a squish on 2A, but he pro-2A enough that he's likely no worse than Kennedy. I, too, am struggling with his idea of "tradition" - whether he's referring to countrywide or within a state. It sounds like he was saying DC's laws were extreme as compared to the rest of the country (as MartyZ is arguing). Would he also hold that NY, NJ, CA's were "extreme" and should be tossed - or would he then be arguing, "yeah, but those laws are longstanding and traditional within those states, so we're not going to overturn them?" That's not 100 percent clear to me after reading all these articles.

I think the court likely did not move forward appreciably (if at all) on 2A issues with this nomination. But we probably didn't lose ground either. I'm not surprised by that.... it's not like this nomination is replacing one of the liberal Supremes.... this nomination never had the capacity to be seriously game-changing IMO based on Kennedy's prior 2A votes! 

BTW, nor do I think Trump is any kind of "yuge" 2A champion (I think his son is, but not him). He's just playing to his base. If we happen to get one of the liberal justices replaced, that could be a game-changer... but even then I think it would be almost a happy by-product of Trump choosing a justice from that same list who respects the Constitution, not because Trump really cares all that much about 2A. That's OK - I could live with that. I don't ever hope for people's demise...so let's hope for a retirement or two! RBG, etc.

And what happens if Trump doesn't have an opportunity to replace a liberal? Wouldn't we had been better off if Trump had nominated someone that's solidly on our camp?

And by our camp I mean the 2A camp. And I didn't even looked into his record on the 4th and 5th and already have a few concerns about him.

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, capt14k said:

Though Trump did campaign on being strong Pro 2A. Like a dummy I actually believed him. Others still do or they make excuses for his lies. I believe you never did believe him. You were right. I was wrong. So if we are going to have a lying POTUS might as well have a proven strong Conservative like Cruz or Pence who are both strong Pro 2A.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Those are Presidential choices that would normally be rejected by a large part of the electorate, quite frankly.... which would normally make Dem chances quite strong. Then again, at the moment, I think the Dems are really in turmoil. They're being ripped apart, as I see it, by internal division - the old guard establishment and the new socialist wing. I could be wrong, but I think if a really heavily left-leaning socialist is nominated - Americans might not embrace that - and a conservative might actually have a shot.

So hard to project this far out thuugh. 1000 different things could happen. But, again, the vast majority of Trump's nominations thus far have been more good than bad for the 2A. Let's just see what happens next...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those are Presidential choices that would normally be rejected by a large part of the electorate, quite frankly.... which would normally make Dem chances quite strong. Then again, at the moment, I think the Dems are really in turmoil. They're being ripped apart, as I see it, by internal division - the old guard establishment and the new socialist wing. I could be wrong, but I think if a really heavily left-leaning socialist is nominated - Americans might not embrace that - and a conservative might actually have a shot.
So hard to project this far out thuugh. 1000 different things could happen. But, again, the vast majority of Trump's nominations thus far have been more good than bad for the 2A. Let's just see what happens next...


Hopefully next is a true Conservative POTUS like Cruz.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WP22 said:

And what happens if Trump doesn't have an opportunity to replace a liberal? Wouldn't we had been better off if Trump had nominated someone that's solidly on our camp?

And by our camp I mean the 2A camp. And I didn't even looked into his record on the 4th and 5th and already have a few concerns about him.

 

 

Ummm...I don't think we disagree. I think Hardiman would have been better and I stated that. I just can't see how gnashing of teeth/rending of garments over Kavanaugh is helpful. It could have been better... but it could have been much worse. At least he's keeping to the list... can you imagine if he were winging this on his own??? :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How come the Trump can do no wrong crowd hasn't touched his nominee Mark Bennett to the 9th Circuit?? Cat got your tongues? Is it possible Trump isn't the big 2A Supporter many think he is?

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk



Did you ever think that maybe you aren’t getting responses because no one here is in the “Trump can do no wrong” crowd. You keep addressing your query to some phantom you made up in your mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...