Go Back   Literotica Discussion Board > Main Literotica Forums > General Board

Reply
 
Thread Tools

Old 02-12-2013, 03:40 PM   #101
Colonel Hogan
Madness
 
Colonel Hogan's Avatar
 
Colonel Hogan is online now
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Within easy reach
Posts: 12,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtSpiderMan View Post
They lose the privilege of owning a gun, but not any of their rights.
Since you apparently have such precise knowledge of the differences between rights and privileges, perhaps you could list those rights that government can never legally take away from an individual.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2013, 03:50 PM   #102
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
 
SgtSpiderMan's Avatar
 
SgtSpiderMan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The City Beautiful
Posts: 15,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Hogan View Post
Since you apparently have such precise knowledge of the differences between rights and privileges, perhaps you could list those rights that government can never legally take away from an individual.
Of course. I've read lots of what your written and you're smarter than me so you could probably name them too.
__________________
I only watch shows that begin with the title "Worlds' Blankiest Blank"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2013, 03:56 PM   #103
CHNOPS
Loves amps
 
CHNOPS's Avatar
 
CHNOPS is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 8,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Hogan View Post
Here again, the imprecision of the philosophy underlying the process of regulation that we go through, though it may result in the likelihood of the most dangerous weapons being regulated, is nothing like an "algorithm." If it was as simple as applying a formula, we would not be debating it.

Since one of the framer's intentions in the construct of the Second Amendment was to allow for the preservation of state militias in order for the collective citizenry to throw off an oppressive government by force, I will suggest that the default mindset when approaching the Constitutionality of firearms regulation ought to be for allowing personal ownership of as many firearms with as little regulation as possible.

In fact, that seems to me a preferable default mindset in any event: unfettered liberty favored over all but the most necessary constraints.

At bare minimum, the Supreme Court in affirming the individual Constitutional right to keep and bare arms did so, in the case of Heller, with an eye toward the lawful uses of firearms such as of self-defense, hunting and whatever recreational pleasure some find in inanimate target shooting or skeet. I would expect weapons suitable for these purposes to always enjoy Constitutional protection.

But the uniformity which the minimum Constitutional protection demands does not imply a uniform set of restrictions from state-to-state. This is the fallacy of approaching Constitutional interpretation through the search for "algorithms of restrictions" rather than the scope of rights to be protected.

Justice Scalia, in writing for the majority in Heller, addressed that point:
I think I may have been unclear.

"Arms," as understood contemporaneously, meant "the tools of warfare."

Guns are tools of warfare, to be sure, but so are bombs, gases, tanks, satellites, drones, grenades, rocket launchers, and so on.

The "algorithm" (my term again, not the court's or the framers') seems fairly straightforward on critical inspection: if any one weapon can allow one person to do disproportionate harm to many, we restrict or prohibit it outright.

We (global we) allow for the restriction of this Constitutionally granted right without much noise. There is not a National Nuclear Warhead Association lobbying for the rights of citizens to keep and bear nuclear rockets, nor a National Sarin Gas Association urging the widespread and responsible ownership of sarin gas. Yet when it comes to guns, that algorithm breaks down: some guns allow one person with a single weapon to do disproportionate harm to many, and we seem distinctly opposed to regulating them.

Why the exception for this single tool of warfare, as opposed to any other?
__________________
Member: Rockers Against Rockers Having Causes (RARHC)
The work they do is very important. Please join now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2013, 05:01 PM   #104
BotanyBoy
I just love flowers.
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Duderville NorCal
Posts: 13,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtSpiderMan View Post
So which amendment protects your right to remain alive?
No such thing champ...you exist only because the state allows it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2013, 11:20 PM   #105
SgtSpiderMan
Literotica Guru
 
SgtSpiderMan's Avatar
 
SgtSpiderMan is offline
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The City Beautiful
Posts: 15,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post
No such thing champ...you exist only because the state allows it.
That was my point.
__________________
I only watch shows that begin with the title "Worlds' Blankiest Blank"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-12-2013, 11:54 PM   #106
John Doe
Insert Title Here
 
John Doe's Avatar
 
John Doe is offline
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New New York
Posts: 53,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtSpiderMan View Post
They lose the privilege of owning a gun, but not any of their rights.
I mean prisoners in general, not just those convicted of gun-related crimes.
__________________
Warning!:

This poster makes no warranties, express or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, reliability or suitability of this statement, of its constituent parts, or of any supporting data. These terms are subject to change without notice.

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 12:50 AM   #107
BotanyBoy
I just love flowers.
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Duderville NorCal
Posts: 13,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtSpiderMan View Post
That was my point.
Right on...idk why everyone in murikuh keeps insisting that we have any or that we are a nation of free people, selling milk can land you in prison for fucks sake...#1 police/prison nation on earth. They will do whatever the fuck they want...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:09 AM   #108
the_kuntess
Literotica Guru
 
the_kuntess's Avatar
 
the_kuntess is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: East of the red centre.
Posts: 597
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post
Right on...idk why everyone in murikuh keeps insisting that we have any or that we are a nation of free people, selling milk can land you in prison for fucks sake...#1 police/prison nation on earth. They will do whatever the fuck they want...
Yep, the US is right at the top of heap when it comes to per capita imprisonment.

There might be factors that skew these figures, you'd have to dig a little deeper to get a fair comparison.



http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...ers-per-capita
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:11 AM   #109
BotanyBoy
I just love flowers.
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Duderville NorCal
Posts: 13,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_kuntess View Post
Yep, the US is right at the top of heap when it comes to per capita imprisonment.

There might be factors that skew these figures, you'd have to dig a little deeper to get a fair comparison.



http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cr...ers-per-capita
Oh please...we have so many laws we can't even count all the fuckers....and that's just federal. The average citizen commits 3 felonies a day and doesn't even know it.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:36 AM   #110
Colonel Hogan
Madness
 
Colonel Hogan's Avatar
 
Colonel Hogan is online now
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Within easy reach
Posts: 12,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHNOPS View Post
I think I may have been unclear.

"Arms," as understood contemporaneously, meant "the tools of warfare."

Guns are tools of warfare, to be sure, but so are bombs, gases, tanks, satellites, drones, grenades, rocket launchers, and so on.

The "algorithm" (my term again, not the court's or the framers') seems fairly straightforward on critical inspection: if any one weapon can allow one person to do disproportionate harm to many, we restrict or prohibit it outright.

We (global we) allow for the restriction of this Constitutionally granted right without much noise. There is not a National Nuclear Warhead Association lobbying for the rights of citizens to keep and bear nuclear rockets, nor a National Sarin Gas Association urging the widespread and responsible ownership of sarin gas. Yet when it comes to guns, that algorithm breaks down: some guns allow one person with a single weapon to do disproportionate harm to many, and we seem distinctly opposed to regulating them.

Why the exception for this single tool of warfare, as opposed to any other?
I suppose it is no more complicated than to speculate that it is a "popularity contest" that hand grenades and mustard gas lost. The tradition of personal ownership of guns in this country is not only historical, but it is also markedly utilitarian in a way that other arms are not.

When we think we hear a burglar rumbling around downstairs, we don't drag a howitzer behind us to investigate.

Duck hunters don't insist on wielding machine guns in their blinds because they seem satisfied with a mallard or two rather than trying to bag the entire flock as they take flight from the pond.

Gun owners insist on exerting their Second Amendment right with respect to handguns and rifles because it seems those weapons yield the best fit for the lawful personal use of firearms as they have for centuries.

I don't think there is much more to it than that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:41 AM   #111
the_kuntess
Literotica Guru
 
the_kuntess's Avatar
 
the_kuntess is offline
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: East of the red centre.
Posts: 597
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post
Oh please...we have so many laws we can't even count all the fuckers....and that's just federal. The average citizen commits 3 felonies a day and doesn't even know it.
I get your point, but I sometimes wish we (Australia/NZ) would follow similar sentencing protocols to the US for certain crimes.

We roll our crims over way too fast. Life is not life, life can be 12 -15 years if you're a good criminal citizen.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 02:12 AM   #112
Colonel Hogan
Madness
 
Colonel Hogan's Avatar
 
Colonel Hogan is online now
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Within easy reach
Posts: 12,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by SgtSpiderMan View Post
Of course. I've read lots of what your written and you're smarter than me so you could probably name them too.
Given your apparent calculus on the scope of an individual right vs. a privilege, I'm not certain I could.

Incarcerated felons have obviously forfeited the right to liberty and the "pursuit of happiness," and should they reside on death row, then their right to life hangs in the balance as well.

The fact that their cells may be searched without a warrant and contraband property seized without compensation are also well established deprived "rights" that those of us on the outside have retained.

About the only thing left is the right freeing us from self-incrimination and that any punishment to which we may be subjected is, by presumption, neither "cruel and unusual."

But I've lost the desire to argue the point with you. If your cynicism about government is so deep that few if any rights can be said to exist, that's your prerogative.

But justices writing legal opinions use words in specific ways which those engaged in legal debates understand and generally accept even when they disagree with the resulting legal finding. The law tends to be dismissive (if not worse) toward those who arrive at different interpretations based on their own rules and definitions, especially when bereft of any apparent supportive constituency.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 02:44 AM   #113
BotanyBoy
I just love flowers.
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Duderville NorCal
Posts: 13,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_kuntess View Post
I get your point, but I sometimes wish we (Australia/NZ) would follow similar sentencing protocols to the US for certain crimes.

We roll our crims over way too fast. Life is not life, life can be 12 -15 years if you're a good criminal citizen.
It's the same here in every state I believe....unless stipulated "without chance of parole" or something along those lines keeping them in for good. Our fed prisons are the only ones that you catch 10? You are doing 10...

I can appreciate that. I wish we would get a clue and quit executing people...doesn't do anything but run the bills up.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 03:01 AM   #114
JAMESBJOHNSON
TRAILER TRASH KING.
 
JAMESBJOHNSON's Avatar
 
JAMESBJOHNSON is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 44,998
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanH View Post
I see Vette and his bottom don't get it. OK, here's how it works. The right has been propounding a theory that more guns will prevent nutjobs shooters. It only takes ONE example of that not being the case to falsify the theory. Just one. Which I did in the OP.
No. Implicit in your post is deterence you cant measure. All kinds of things deter action.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 03:36 AM   #115
shoulderblade
Literotica Guru
 
shoulderblade's Avatar
 
shoulderblade is offline
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: SW Ontario
Posts: 7,377
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_kuntess View Post
Yep, the US is right at the top of heap when it comes to per capita imprisonment.

There might be factors that skew these figures, you'd have to dig a little deeper to get a fair comparison.
When it comes to per capita imprisonment there really isn't any room for waggling, you are being held in prison or you are not.

When it comes to definition of crimes, process, length of sentence, parole terms or whatever there may be lots of room for comparison but jail is jail. Americans have a punitive oriented juatice system with lots of laws and enforcement capacity so a lot of people wind up in prison, simple as that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:17 PM   #116
CHNOPS
Loves amps
 
CHNOPS's Avatar
 
CHNOPS is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 8,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Hogan View Post
I suppose it is no more complicated than to speculate that it is a "popularity contest" that hand grenades and mustard gas lost. The tradition of personal ownership of guns in this country is not only historical, but it is also markedly utilitarian in a way that other arms are not.

When we think we hear a burglar rumbling around downstairs, we don't drag a howitzer behind us to investigate.

Duck hunters don't insist on wielding machine guns in their blinds because they seem satisfied with a mallard or two rather than trying to bag the entire flock as they take flight from the pond.

Gun owners insist on exerting their Second Amendment right with respect to handguns and rifles because it seems those weapons yield the best fit for the lawful personal use of firearms as they have for centuries.

I don't think there is much more to it than that.
Fair enough. So, are there other instances where Constitutional protections are applied specifically and exclusively to the "majority" group in a population, and denied to the "minority"?
__________________
Member: Rockers Against Rockers Having Causes (RARHC)
The work they do is very important. Please join now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:21 PM   #117
Sean
*********
 
Sean's Avatar
 
Sean is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eating foie gras in a Porsche.
Posts: 81,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHNOPS View Post
Fair enough. So, are there other instances where Constitutional protections are applied specifically and exclusively to the "majority" group in a population, and denied to the "minority"?
More to the point, is there anywhere else on Earth where retards think decisions made over two hundred years ago are the last word of wisdom on a subject?
__________________
"Well you are the nice one, you're supposed to think that."
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:28 PM   #118
JohnnySavage
scapolo
 
JohnnySavage's Avatar
 
JohnnySavage is offline
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: On the banks of the Potomac
Posts: 29,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHNOPS View Post
Fair enough. So, are there other instances where Constitutional protections are applied specifically and exclusively to the "majority" group in a population, and denied to the "minority"?
Quartering of troops.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:29 PM   #119
CHNOPS
Loves amps
 
CHNOPS's Avatar
 
CHNOPS is offline
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 8,245
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnySavage View Post
Quartering of troops.
LOL plus two more characters
__________________
Member: Rockers Against Rockers Having Causes (RARHC)
The work they do is very important. Please join now.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 01:49 PM   #120
koalabear
~Armed and Fuzzy~
 
koalabear's Avatar
 
koalabear is offline
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: over there----->
Posts: 102,623
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanH View Post
FBI agents and U.S. Marshals understandably are well fortified, given their frequent run-ins with ruthless bad guys. However -- as my old friend and fellow columnist Quin Hillyer notes -- armed officers, if not Special Weapons and Tactics crews, populate these federal agencies: the National Park Service; the Postal Inspection Service; the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Labor, and Veterans Affairs; the Bureaus of Land Management and Indian Affairs, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Even Small Business Administration and Railroad Retirement Board staffers pack heat!


seanh forgot to tell the government.
__________________
GBers are like Bran Muffins, not much substance, yet they produce a lot of shit. "^^"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 02:34 PM   #121
Colonel Hogan
Madness
 
Colonel Hogan's Avatar
 
Colonel Hogan is online now
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Within easy reach
Posts: 12,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by CHNOPS View Post
Fair enough. So, are there other instances where Constitutional protections are applied specifically and exclusively to the "majority" group in a population, and denied to the "minority"?
Of course. Anywhere you find a legal precedent that holds that a specific right is not absolute I believe you will find an exception where the "minority" abuse of a right is denied protection because of its danger to the "majority."

If the majority of movie goers felt they had need to yell "fire" in a perfectly safe theater, courts might be inspired to tweak the law in a different way. But as long as such behavior is restricted to a minority of demented individuals, it seems reasonable to make the utterance an exception to the general rule of free speech.

This principle of qualification is common throughout the law. One of the challenges in applying it, however, is for judges not to rely upon it where and when a formal amendment through the legislative process is more appropriate. The debate around where this switch point is to be found is often at the core of our Constitutional disagreements, even when it is not being voiced.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 02:42 PM   #122
Colonel Hogan
Madness
 
Colonel Hogan's Avatar
 
Colonel Hogan is online now
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Within easy reach
Posts: 12,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by SeanH View Post
More to the point, is there anywhere else on Earth where retards think decisions made over two hundred years ago are the last word of wisdom on a subject?
I found this in your trash out on the curb. I'm assuming you discarded it inadvertently.

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 02:48 PM   #123
Sean
*********
 
Sean's Avatar
 
Sean is offline
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Eating foie gras in a Porsche.
Posts: 81,457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Hogan View Post
I found this in your trash out on the curb. I'm assuming you discarded it inadvertently.

If you can find me a bit of Magna Carta quoted every day in defence of some anachronistic bullshit, then you might have a point.
__________________
"Well you are the nice one, you're supposed to think that."
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 02:55 PM   #124
BotanyBoy
I just love flowers.
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Duderville NorCal
Posts: 13,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by shoulderblade View Post
When it comes to per capita imprisonment there really isn't any room for waggling, you are being held in prison or you are not.

When it comes to definition of crimes, process, length of sentence, parole terms or whatever there may be lots of room for comparison but jail is jail. Americans have a punitive oriented juatice system with lots of laws and enforcement capacity so a lot of people wind up in prison, simple as that.


Let's see if we can outlaw some more naturally occurring plants, ban farmers markets all over (No FDA OVERSIGHT!!! PRISON!!!) the nation, maybe AIR!!! YEaaaaaa we can ban AIR and put EVERYONE in prison!! Profits will be at an all time high!!

Fucking embarrassing being american sometimes.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-13-2013, 03:13 PM   #125
butters
Harry's Girl
 
butters's Avatar
 
butters is offline
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London UK
Posts: 51,441
the MC supplied the basics of English liberties - forcing King John to revert to using older laws combined with new with the intention of demonstrating how the power of an ordained king could be limited by a written document in the interest of the public.

i would say brits are far more concerned with the spirit of a law than its letter; they won't allow outmoded language or interests to stand in the way of progression for the betterment of society, but will frequently challenge ancient laws when their use becomes anachronistic with time.
__________________
poetry submissions


What strange machinery lies between her ears
HarryHill


'tender hearted...
  Reply With Quote
Reply


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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:14 AM.

Copyright 1998-2013 Literotica Online. Literotica is a registered trademark.