vBCms Comments
Welcome To Hunting Country
General Hunting Forums
Archery & Bowhunting
Shooting Sports
Manufacturers' Corner
Firearms
Classifieds
Not Hunting / General Chit Chat
1.) DParker - 07/27/2014
Wow. Normally I follow these developments very closely, but I've been busy lately and this one managed to take me by surprise. Unless and until D.C. can formulate and adopt a licensing scheme that can pass muster with the court, as of now the District is a constitutional carry jurisdiction for both residents and nonresidents alike. Alan Gura is 'da man.
[url]http://alangura.com/2014/07/victory-in-palmer-v-d-c/[/url]
[url]http://alangura.com/2014/07/victory-in-palmer-v-d-c/[/url]
2.) Hunter - 07/27/2014
Lets see what Bloomburg says about that!
3.) Swamp Fox - 07/29/2014
Yeah, that crossed my radar, too.
Not that I've read everything, but this was one of my most interesting/ favorite commentaries fairly early on:
[I]This matters. Although the Supreme Court has now twice acknowledged that the Second Amendment recognizes an individual right per se, the details of that protection are still being ironed out. As Scullin himself noted, for all of its significance, Heller does not “speak explicitly or precisely to the scope of the Second Amendment right outside the home,” nor does it adumbrate “what it takes to ‘infringe’ that right.” That question has been left to the lower courts.
Those courts are answering it rather variously. The Ninth and Seventh Circuits have previously held that the Second Amendment’s protection extends to the right to “bear” — as well as to “keep” — arms (“self-defense outside the home is part of the core right to ‘bear arms,’” the Ninth averred in Peruta, and “no amount of interest-balancing under a heightened form of means-end scrutiny can justify” its total infringement); while the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits have ruled either that it does not extend so far or that the state’s power to curtail the right is strong enough to render it a dead letter. [B]In consequence, Americans in different parts of the country now enjoy substantially different rights under the law. In one America, states are prohibited from imposing onerous burdens on individuals who wish to carry firearms; in the other, states have almost free rein. Scullin’s decision throws another pro-liberty judgment into the mix, deepening the chasm and increasing the likelihood that a future case will make its way to the Supreme Court for resolution. For those keeping score, we’re now at parity, with three restrictive decisions and three expansive decisions on the federal courts’ books. With a host of similar cases pending across the country, one wonders if the Roberts Court can hold off for much longer...
[/B]
That the nation’s capital has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into compliance with the Constitution is an abject disgrace. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington, D.C.’s single non-voting delegate, contended earlier in the year that “making a big city, which is also the nation’s capital, and a prime terrorist target, one of the most permissive gun jurisdictions in the country would be madness.” With respect to Representative Norton, I would submit that the contrary is true. For almost four decades now, the seat of the United States government has brazenly disregarded the principles and parameters of the very Constitution by which it was created, setting a disastrous example for the rest of the country and daubing an unlovely blot on the escutcheon of liberty. “Congratulations, Americans,” the architect of the lawsuit wrote, when the response came down. “Your capital is not a constitution-free zone.” Not for now, at least.
[Emphasis mine.]
[/I]
[url]http://www.nationalreview.com/article/383971/dc-no-longer-constitution-free-zone-charles-c-w-cooke[/url]
Not that I've read everything, but this was one of my most interesting/ favorite commentaries fairly early on:
[I]This matters. Although the Supreme Court has now twice acknowledged that the Second Amendment recognizes an individual right per se, the details of that protection are still being ironed out. As Scullin himself noted, for all of its significance, Heller does not “speak explicitly or precisely to the scope of the Second Amendment right outside the home,” nor does it adumbrate “what it takes to ‘infringe’ that right.” That question has been left to the lower courts.
Those courts are answering it rather variously. The Ninth and Seventh Circuits have previously held that the Second Amendment’s protection extends to the right to “bear” — as well as to “keep” — arms (“self-defense outside the home is part of the core right to ‘bear arms,’” the Ninth averred in Peruta, and “no amount of interest-balancing under a heightened form of means-end scrutiny can justify” its total infringement); while the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits have ruled either that it does not extend so far or that the state’s power to curtail the right is strong enough to render it a dead letter. [B]In consequence, Americans in different parts of the country now enjoy substantially different rights under the law. In one America, states are prohibited from imposing onerous burdens on individuals who wish to carry firearms; in the other, states have almost free rein. Scullin’s decision throws another pro-liberty judgment into the mix, deepening the chasm and increasing the likelihood that a future case will make its way to the Supreme Court for resolution. For those keeping score, we’re now at parity, with three restrictive decisions and three expansive decisions on the federal courts’ books. With a host of similar cases pending across the country, one wonders if the Roberts Court can hold off for much longer...
[/B]
That the nation’s capital has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into compliance with the Constitution is an abject disgrace. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington, D.C.’s single non-voting delegate, contended earlier in the year that “making a big city, which is also the nation’s capital, and a prime terrorist target, one of the most permissive gun jurisdictions in the country would be madness.” With respect to Representative Norton, I would submit that the contrary is true. For almost four decades now, the seat of the United States government has brazenly disregarded the principles and parameters of the very Constitution by which it was created, setting a disastrous example for the rest of the country and daubing an unlovely blot on the escutcheon of liberty. “Congratulations, Americans,” the architect of the lawsuit wrote, when the response came down. “Your capital is not a constitution-free zone.” Not for now, at least.
[Emphasis mine.]
[/I]
[url]http://www.nationalreview.com/article/383971/dc-no-longer-constitution-free-zone-charles-c-w-cooke[/url]
4.) DParker - 07/29/2014
[Quote]Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington, D.C.’s single non-voting delegate, contended earlier in the year that “making a big city, which is also the nation’s capital, and a prime terrorist target, one of the most permissive gun jurisdictions in the country would be madness.”[/quote]
Because being the nation's most restrictive gun jurisdiction and remaining the murder capitol of North America is the epitome of sound mental health.
Because being the nation's most restrictive gun jurisdiction and remaining the murder capitol of North America is the epitome of sound mental health.
5.) Swamp Fox - 07/29/2014
Having lugged my duffel bag from Max's dive bar near the Key Bridge all the way to the Trailways bus station on more than a few Sunday mornings, I can tell you that Washington, DC is the epitome of exactly nothing. :bang:
Nadir, we can talk about... :wink
Nadir, we can talk about... :wink
6.) Swamp Fox - 07/29/2014
Of course, anyone can be in trouble with his mom, so maybe DC is just the prodigal son of America:
[I]TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. State Rep. Wayne Schmidt has picked up support from an unlikely source in a closely watched battle for an open Senate seat in northern Michigan: his opponent's mom.
Schmidt, of Traverse City, will face fellow Republican Rep. Greg MacMaster in the Aug. 5 primary for the 37th District seat.
MacMaster's mother, Michele, told the Traverse City Record-Eagle that Schmidt is "the better candidate," citing his background and community activities. She declined to discuss her relationship with her son.
Greg MacMaster, of Kewadin, said he hasn't spoken to his mom in 21 years and said she left him to live with his alcoholic father as a boy. Once his dad died, he later lived with his mother and stepfather.
It's "unfortunate some people choose to take politics to a personal level. For voters, politics should be about my positions, the votes I have taken, my conservative values," MacMaster said....
Read more here: [url]http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/07/28/5071703/northern-michigan-lawmakers-mom.html#storylink=cpy[/url]
[/I]...
[I]TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. State Rep. Wayne Schmidt has picked up support from an unlikely source in a closely watched battle for an open Senate seat in northern Michigan: his opponent's mom.
Schmidt, of Traverse City, will face fellow Republican Rep. Greg MacMaster in the Aug. 5 primary for the 37th District seat.
MacMaster's mother, Michele, told the Traverse City Record-Eagle that Schmidt is "the better candidate," citing his background and community activities. She declined to discuss her relationship with her son.
Greg MacMaster, of Kewadin, said he hasn't spoken to his mom in 21 years and said she left him to live with his alcoholic father as a boy. Once his dad died, he later lived with his mother and stepfather.
It's "unfortunate some people choose to take politics to a personal level. For voters, politics should be about my positions, the votes I have taken, my conservative values," MacMaster said....
Read more here: [url]http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/07/28/5071703/northern-michigan-lawmakers-mom.html#storylink=cpy[/url]
[/I]...
7.) DParker - 07/29/2014
[QUOTE]MacMaster's mother, Michele, told the Traverse City Record-Eagle that Schmidt is "the better candidate," citing his background and community activities. She declined to discuss her relationship with her son.[/quote]
Ouch. That's gonna' leave a mark.
Ouch. That's gonna' leave a mark.
8.) Swamp Fox - 07/29/2014
It's like the time my mom threw out my Elton John albums...
9.) bluecat - 07/29/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;22616]
That the nation’s capital has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into compliance with the Constitution is an abject disgrace. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington, D.C.’s single non-voting delegate, contended earlier in the year that “making a big city, which is also the nation’s capital, and a prime terrorist target, one of the most permissive gun jurisdictions in the country would be madness.” With respect to Representative Norton, I would submit that the contrary is true. For almost four decades now, the seat of the United States government has brazenly disregarded the principles and parameters of the very Constitution by which it was created, setting a disastrous example for the rest of the country and daubing an unlovely blot on the escutcheon of liberty. “Congratulations, Americans,” the architect of the lawsuit wrote, when the response came down. “Your capital is not a constitution-free zone.” Not for now, at least.
[/QUOTE]
:tu:
"escutcheon?" Swampy, I barely passed third grade. Go easy on us.
That the nation’s capital has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into compliance with the Constitution is an abject disgrace. Eleanor Holmes Norton, Washington, D.C.’s single non-voting delegate, contended earlier in the year that “making a big city, which is also the nation’s capital, and a prime terrorist target, one of the most permissive gun jurisdictions in the country would be madness.” With respect to Representative Norton, I would submit that the contrary is true. For almost four decades now, the seat of the United States government has brazenly disregarded the principles and parameters of the very Constitution by which it was created, setting a disastrous example for the rest of the country and daubing an unlovely blot on the escutcheon of liberty. “Congratulations, Americans,” the architect of the lawsuit wrote, when the response came down. “Your capital is not a constitution-free zone.” Not for now, at least.
[/QUOTE]
:tu:
"escutcheon?" Swampy, I barely passed third grade. Go easy on us.
10.) Swamp Fox - 07/29/2014
:-)
Send your letters of complaint to the author. I am just the messenger.
"I do not like big words in a post.
I do not like them hard, the most. "
Send your letters of complaint to the author. I am just the messenger.
"I do not like big words in a post.
I do not like them hard, the most. "
11.) Swamp Fox - 07/29/2014
[QUOTE=Swamp Fox;22628]:-)
Send your letters of complaint to the author. I am just the messenger.
"I do not like big words in a post.
I do not like them hard, the most. "[/QUOTE]
On the other hand, you might want to just call him. The less committed to print, the better sometimes. :wink
[url]https://twitter.com/charlescwcooke/status/493840828104593408/photo/1[/url]
Send your letters of complaint to the author. I am just the messenger.
"I do not like big words in a post.
I do not like them hard, the most. "[/QUOTE]
On the other hand, you might want to just call him. The less committed to print, the better sometimes. :wink
[url]https://twitter.com/charlescwcooke/status/493840828104593408/photo/1[/url]
12.) Swamp Fox - 07/29/2014
[I][SIZE=4][B]I started a topless gun protest because ammo-sexuals still won't shut up[/B][/SIZE][/I]
She's outraged that she's not intimidated, if you read the story.
So...open carry and boobs...what's not to love?
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/29/topless-gun-protest-open-carry-advocates[/url]
She's outraged that she's not intimidated, if you read the story.
So...open carry and boobs...what's not to love?
[url]http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/29/topless-gun-protest-open-carry-advocates[/url]
13.) DParker - 07/29/2014
Yeah...unfortunately it's almost always the ones you'd rather keep their shirts on who decide to flop 'em out in public to make some dopey point.
14.) bluecat - 07/30/2014
[QUOTE=DParker;22642]Yeah...unfortunately it's almost always the ones you'd rather keep their shirts on who decide to flop 'em out in public to make some dopey point.[/QUOTE]
I agree. If your boobs are floppy, conceal carry is your best option.
I agree. If your boobs are floppy, conceal carry is your best option.
15.) Deerminator - 07/31/2014
ouch!!
That last one hurt
That last one hurt