Sniper 6,372 Posted June 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, PeteF said: Well now in the category of "Are you fucking kidding" Nope.. as expected... Are we all still believing that the new Conservative judges will be coming to the 2A rescue?? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brucin 923 Posted June 24, 2019 I agree with Gorsuch. The wording that was found to be vague sounds like it was written by NJ state legislators. Make the law say exactly what it means by including the words robbery, rape, assault and murder. Then it will pass constitutional muster. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
voyager9 3,439 Posted June 25, 2019 1 hour ago, PeteF said: Well now in the category of "Are you fucking kidding" https://www.foxnews.com/politics/gorsuch-sides-with-liberals-in-shooting-down-tougher-sentences-for-gun-crimes Its unconstitutional to increase penalties for using a gun in a crime, but its perfectly alright to increase penalties for NOT commiting a crime. It’s unconstitutional to prosecute using overly vague laws. I don’t see how that’s a bad thing.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kevin125 4,772 Posted June 25, 2019 3 hours ago, brucin said: I agree with Gorsuch. The wording that was found to be vague sounds like it was written by NJ state legislators. Make the law say exactly what it means by including the words robbery, rape, assault and murder. Then it will pass constitutional muster. I agree with your agreement. It sounds like he had issues with the vagueness of the proposed law. Not with the concept of increasing penalties. At least I hope so. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites