Why register with the Steelers Fever Forums?
 • Intelligent and friendly discussions.
 • It's free and it's quick. Always.
 • Enter events in the forums calendar.
 • Very user friendly software.
 • Exclusive contests and giveaways.

 Donate to Steelers Fever, Click here
 Our 2014 Goal: $450.00 - To Date: $450.00 (100.00%)
 Home | Forums | Editorials | Shop | Tickets | Downloads | Contact Pittsburgh Steelers Forum Feed Not Just Fans. Hardcore Fans.

Go Back   Steelers Fever Forums > Miscellaneous > Locker Room


Steelers Fever Fan Shop

Doc's Sports Get FREE NFL Picks and College Football picks as well as Football Lines like live NFL Lines and updated NFL Power Rankings all at Doc's Sports Service.

Steelers Fever Presents...

Steelers Panthers

GAMEDAY
Sunday, September 21, 8:30 PM
NBC
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-16-2013, 02:24 PM   #41
SteelCityMom
MST3K Junkie
 
SteelCityMom's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the land of The Crazies
Posts: 7,687
Gender: Female
Member Number: 16666
Thanks: 2,756
Thanked 2,399 Times in 1,123 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atlanta Dan View Post
You may be reading a lot more into Heller than is there

Heller held that an absolute ban upon handguns by the District of Columbia violated the Second Amendment right to self-defense - if there is anything in there about the right to bear semi-automatic weapons I missed it

What Justice Scalia did say about other weapons was as follows

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely
explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. ...


It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely
detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens
capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as
effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small
arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful against modern day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right.


http://www.scotusblog.com/wp-content.../06/07-290.pdf

Scalia at the very least leaves open the possibility that a M-16 can be banned - if you can ban the M-16 without violating the Second Amendment it certainly is not a stretch to argue the AR-15 and other semi-automatics that would be "most useful" in military service also can be banned without violating the Second Amendment. Just because a weapon might be used for sporting purposes (machine guns would certainly be an effective means of culling the deer population) is not the end of the argument.

In accordance with that line of reasoning, the DC Circuit upheld a ban on assault weapons and certain types of ammunition, after Heller, as not being in violation of the Second Amendment in a challenge to that law by the same plaintiff who previously had challenged the handgun ban successfully in the Supreme Court's Heller decision. The law that was upheld:

defines “assault weapon” to include certain brands and models of semi-automatic rifles, pistols, and shotguns, such as the Colt AR-15 series of rifles, as well as semi-automatic firearms with certain features, regardless of make and model, such as a semi-automatic rifle with a “pistol grip that protrudes conspicuously beneath the action of the weapon” or a “thumbhole stock.” 7-2501.01(3A)(A). The District also prohibits possession of “any large capacity ammunition feeding device,” which includes “a magazine ... or similar device that has a capacity of ... more than 10 rounds of ammunition.” [/B][/B]..

In upholding the DC ban on those weapons, as opposed to handguns, the DC Circuit held

The plaintiffs contend semi-automatic rifles, in particular the AR variants, are commonly possessed for self-protection in the home as well as for sport. They also argue magazines holding more than ten rounds are commonly possessed for self-defense and for other lawful purposes and that the prohibition of such magazines would impose a burden upon them. Specifically, they point out that without a large-capacity magazine it would be necessary, in a stressful situation, to pause in order to reload the firearm....

Although we cannot be confident the prohibitions impinge at all upon the core right protected by the Second Amendment, we are reasonably certain the prohibitions do not impose a substantial burden upon that right. As the District points out, the plaintiffs present hardly any evidence that semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten rounds are well-suited to or preferred for the purpose of self-defense or sport. Cf. Kleck & Gertz, supra, at 177 (finding that of 340,000 to 400,000 instances of defensive gun use in which the defenders believed the use of a gun had saved a life, 240,000 to 300,000 involved handguns).
...

Heller suggests “M-16 rifles and the like” may be banned because they are “dangerous and unusual,” see 554 U.S. at 627. The Court had previously described the “AR-15” as “the civilian version of the military’s M-16 rifle.” Staples v. United States, 511 U.S. 600, 603 (1994). Although semi-automatic firearms, unlike automatic M-16s, fire “only one shot with each pull of the trigger,” id. at 602 n.1, semi-automatics still fire almost as rapidly as automatics....

We conclude the District has carried its burden of showing a substantial relationship between the prohibition of both semi-automatic rifles and magazines holding more than ten rounds and the objectives of protecting police officers and controlling crime. Accordingly, the bans do not violate the plaintiffs’ constitutional right to keep and bear arms
.

Heller v. District Of Columbia (aka "Heller II")(D.C. Cir. October 4, 2011)

http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/DECA496973477C748525791F004D84F9/$file/10-7036-1333156.pdf

That holding by the DC Circuit has not been reversed by the Supremes



W was tagged as being a war criminal for overseeing "enhanced interrogation practices" that constituted torture, not for invading Iraq. FWIW I thought the Libya adventure was an improper exercise of executive authority, which is not the same as an international war crime


I wasn't talking about just Heller, but I will sit down and read those links at some point...I don't really have time to read 80 pages of analysis at the moment.

These two things jumped out in my initial browsing though...

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.


Along with the continuation of what you already began quoting...

Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any
manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment
or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast
doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by
felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or
laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of
arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those
“in common use at the time”
finds support in the historical tradition
of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause and effect, but actually from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey...stuff.


http://forums.steelersfever.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=16666&dateline=129531  3365
SteelCityMom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 02:37 PM   #42
SteelCityMom
MST3K Junkie
 
SteelCityMom's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the land of The Crazies
Posts: 7,687
Gender: Female
Member Number: 16666
Thanks: 2,756
Thanked 2,399 Times in 1,123 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killer View Post

Sen. Bob Casey: Gun control measures would not infringe on certain gun rights

Just hours before President Obama unveils proposals for executive measures that would impose stricter policies on gun control, U.S. Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa., said proposals to ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazine clips would not infringe on gun owners' rights.

He also said that an assault weapons ban would not have an “adverse impact” on important considerations for Pennsylvanians

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/ind...bob_casey.html

There are a lot of things I don't like Tom Corbett for (PA Gov.), but he's a lifetime NRA member, and has stated he would never sign a ban into law (he is a politician though, so take that for what it's worth I guess lol).
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause and effect, but actually from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey...stuff.


http://forums.steelersfever.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=16666&dateline=129531  3365
SteelCityMom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 02:50 PM   #43
SteelCityMom
MST3K Junkie
 
SteelCityMom's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the land of The Crazies
Posts: 7,687
Gender: Female
Member Number: 16666
Thanks: 2,756
Thanked 2,399 Times in 1,123 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

In regards to this statement...

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause.

it's worth noting that M-16's aren't banned. You have to jump through a few more hoops, and they are quite expensive (as are the rounds), but they are not banned.

Automatic weapons are "Class III" weapons, and are titled much like cars are. Most firearms dealers do not have a Class III FFL. The title transfer fee is hundreds of dollars, and you need written permission from your local police chief or county sheriff.

1. A registered owner of an NFA firearm may apply to ATF for approval to transfer the firearm to another person residing in the same State or to a Federal firearms licensee in another State;
2. An individual may apply to ATF for approval to make and register an NFA firearm (except for a machine-gun); or
3. An individual may inherit a lawfully registered NFA firearm.

***Sorry for all the separate posts today...I really do know how to multiquote, I swear.
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause and effect, but actually from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey...stuff.


http://forums.steelersfever.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=16666&dateline=129531  3365
SteelCityMom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 05:33 PM   #44
BrandonCarr39
Team Captain
 
BrandonCarr39's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 917
Member Number: 7458
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCMom View Post
To be honest, what Bush Sr. did in this regard is not of much importance to me. I was 9 when he passed the EO you mentioned. So not sure why bringing it up is of importance. He's not the president anymore, and what he did shouldn't matter in what we don't want the current president doing.

One or more former presidents doing unconstitutional things does not mean we have to stand for the current president doing unconstitutional things. I didn't like Bush Jr. either, and looking back on the past, I don't like what Bush Sr. did, or Reagan, or Nixon, or Johnson, etc. etc. That doesn't mean I'm not going to voice my disdain for the current administration and attempt to fight back against unconstitutional laws.

Keep in mind, there are actually people alive who've only seen one or two presidents in their voting age life lol.


My hope is this bill doesn't pass Congress and eventually dies. It'll have a tough time getting through them.
Pt being that Republicans have been responsible just as much as the Democrats. No different from the abortion issue - Roe V Wade was uphelp b/c ALL 5 of the justices that voted to uphold it in 1992 were appointed by Republican Presidents.

They're just merely opposite sides of the same coin.
__________________
Scott A. Johnson - Current Events and Bible Study
http://contendingfortruth.com
BrandonCarr39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 05:50 PM   #45
torpedoshell31
Bench Warmer
 

Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 192
Member Number: 24438
Thanks: 6
Thanked 30 Times in 24 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

As has been stated the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with hunting or even self defense, the real purpose is to protect the citizen from its most danger enemy, an out of control federal government. If the Feds come to take my guns they better have a good supply of body bags.
torpedoshell31 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 08:14 PM   #46
Atlanta Dan
Resigned
Supporter
 
Atlanta Dan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 14,835
Member Number: 728
Thanks: 2,289
Thanked 7,348 Times in 3,283 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

Quote:
Originally Posted by Killer View Post
Obama plans to surround himself with children during gun control announcement

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney announced this afternoon that President Obama will unveil a “concrete package” of gun control proposals including assault weapons bans, high capacity ammunition magazine bans, and closing loopholes on background checks.

Carney said that the president will be joined by Vice President Joe Biden as well as children who wrote to the president after the Newtown shootings.

“They will be joined by children around the country expressing their concerns about gun violence and school safety, along with their parents,” Carney confirmed.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2518621

Can you get any lower? Using children for human shields while dancing on the graves of the dead?

Other Tyrants Who Have Used Children As Props









Dictator Obama Exploiting the Children for Executive Action on Gun Control




http://www.infowars.com/other-tyrant...dren-as-props/

No question only the most depraved and immoral rulers will exploit children for a photo op

Atlanta Dan is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Atlanta Dan For This Useful Post:
harrison'samonster (01-16-2013)
Old 01-16-2013, 10:25 PM   #47
lloydwoodson
Head Coach
 
lloydwoodson's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 1,537
Gender: Male
Member Number: 23495
Thanks: 708
Thanked 403 Times in 272 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

Haha! Dubbya is holding the children's book upside down.

I like to research data when people start talking about issues like this. What I have found from statistics on the FBI website is that handguns account for the overwhelming majority of firearms murders in the USA.

Using Pennsylvania statistics as an example: 379 of the 470 firearms murders committed in 2011 involved handguns- that is a staggering 80.6%. Firearms other than handgun, shotguns and rifles accounted for only 13% of all murders. America will not surrender its handguns- it's just not going to happen- so what is the government really after?

Also, 26% of all murders in Pennsylvania were caused without the use of firearms. More than twice as many people were murdered without the use of firearms as were murdered with the use of assault weapons. Should Obama also be trying to make knives illegal? It will be a lot tougher for Americans to eat dinner.

The bottom line is bad things will always happen and there is no way of preventing them. Citizens giving away all their freedoms to the government and begging the government to take care of them like a parent will not stop tragedies from occuring.

Most European countries as well as my native Canada do not permit assault weapons for private use. There are definite advantages to restricting access to such weapons. The time for the firearms discussion to occur is after the wave of fear caused by 9/11 and the ensuing military engagements has passed. The removal of firearms should not be rammed down America's throat like the Patriot Act or the NDAA.

I personally like living next door to the one country on earth that is armed to the teeth and I hope it stays that way.
lloydwoodson is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to lloydwoodson For This Useful Post:
Blackout (01-17-2013), SteelCityMom (01-16-2013), Steeler7BR (01-16-2013)
Old 01-16-2013, 10:43 PM   #48
SteelCityMom
MST3K Junkie
 
SteelCityMom's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: In the land of The Crazies
Posts: 7,687
Gender: Female
Member Number: 16666
Thanks: 2,756
Thanked 2,399 Times in 1,123 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

I'm pretty sure we can all agree Dubya was a tool. Obama is a tool as well.

We should just forget about that though, because other presidents were tools as well.
__________________
People assume that time is a strict progression of cause and effect, but actually from a non-linear non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey...stuff.


http://forums.steelersfever.com/image.php?type=sigpic&userid=16666&dateline=129531  3365

Last edited by SteelCityMom; 01-16-2013 at 10:53 PM.
SteelCityMom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2013, 11:12 PM   #49
MACH1
Quest For Seven
Supporter
 
MACH1's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Potataho
Posts: 14,156
Member Number: 3236
Thanks: 1,668
Thanked 4,967 Times in 1,848 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws





And just for you Dan.

__________________


ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ
MACH1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2013, 12:11 AM   #50
Fire Haley
Banned
 

Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 10,359
Member Number: 763
Thanks: 53
Thanked 1,098 Times in 768 Posts
Default Re: NY passes new state gun laws

relax, it's for the children

Fire Haley is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Navbar with Avatar by Motorradforum
no new posts