someone should create an anti gun policing force that gets rented by cities/states

What does that have to do with anything?

What the eff are typing about?

 

You said they can not use such contracts (arbitration) if they are utilities.

I pointed out they can so my plan could work. Want water, or want heat/AC then no guns allowed.

 

Utility companies cannot force private citizens to relinquish their constitutional rights in exchange for their services.

 

**** it, just pass the gun ban and then when the court stikes it down ask them what constitutional athority they have to strike down legislation, and don't let them use its an implied power, say NO you have no constitutional power to do so and until the constitution is amendment to give the courts the power of judicial review we will not comply.

They will agree and then an amendment would probably be passed with in a month lol but still stand up against the tyranny because they have no such power.

 

There are over 40k police forces in the United States including single person sheriffs departments. No one is going to generalize what the policies are in anyone department. Of course bad shootings occur....but as a result of bad or inadequate training more often then not.

I’m saying what the general rule and training through the fbi
to state academies that filtered down to official training in towns, counties and cities that engaged in this trained was. IT HASN'T CHANGED FOR DECADES. They were never trained to shoot anyone fleeing unless they presented an immanent threat to the public.

Just turning and running is NO JUSTIFICATION for being shot at by police even for a felon caught in the act without mitigating circumstances.....never was and isn’t now.

You’re watching way too many Dirty Hairy movies.

 

Huh ?

 

Sorry I don’t do the bumper sticker length and slogan posts you are used to from the left and can comprehend.

 

What is not understood on the part of yourself is that laws in the united states, especially laws that blatantly victimize private individuals for legal activities are not "just passed" as if it is the easiest thing in the world to do. Such legislation is fought for months, it never gets out of committees, or draws sufficient cosponsors to be taken up to the floor for voting. Elected officials who have grown to value their holding of office more than the lives of their voting constituents will not touch the issue under any circumstances, as they do not wish for their voting record to be tarnished by something that will take them out of office and force them to get a real job like everyone else.

Depending upon how the firearm-related restriction in question is drafted, it could be struck down as unconstitutional for any number of reasons.

the legal system in the united states does not work that way. Neither you, nor anyone else, is legally allowed to not comply with a ruling by the united state supreme court, no matter how much their ruling may be disagreed with.

They will not.

Enacting a constitutional convention for the purpose of passing a new constitutional amendment is not as easy as all that. Stop making assumptions about matters that are not understood on the part of yourself.

 

I cannot believe that this thread has gone on for 45 pages.
This guy is a delirious troll, has no f***king idea about the laws or constitution of the country he lives in. He references Michigan, I assume he lives there, in some sh**hole urban neighborhood.
He smokes a little crack, then writes down his illusions of grandeur to implement his precious gun ban. This guy is a flake, a troll, and is totally undeserving of all this attention. I've heard better arguments from 3rd graders.

QUIT GIVING HIM AN AUDIENCE! LET HIM WITHER IN THE VINE AND DIE.
AS LONG AS WE RESPOND, HE GETS MORE ATTENTION!

 

MI is **** because the GOP made it that way. I don't smoke anything. It only takes one judge to flip and guns are finished

 

Then do be sure to get back to those present when such actually happens. Until that development does actually become reality, be silent and stay out of matters that do not involve yourself.

 

Depending on the state standing against a gun ban that actually had a plan to stop from being stuck down would be political suicide like my old state of MD or my birth state of NY. Those with good NRA ratings do bad in elections.

Where in the written constitution of the United states does it give the supreme court or any federal court the power to strike down legislation?

Actually it only works if the executive branch upholds it. As we saw with the Native March, form back in the day if they don't enforce it the ruling will not stand

The courts have agreed with congress when they have restricted jurisdiction, and they are VERY aware of their lack of constitutional athority, thats why they only strike down clear cases because they do no want to lose the fake legitimacy they have garnered

The right to vote for 18 year olds passed in 3 months from Congress to Ratification.

 

Meaningless nonsense. Things have changed greatly since the Heller ruling, and old standards of how things used to be are no longer valid of viable.

The judicial branch exists for a reason. And congress has made no effort to revoke its authority to overturn legislation.

Is such current precedent? Did the native march happen recently?

What next? Are you going to propose government should have the authority to kill judges who rule against it?

Demonstrate such. Cite the historical examples that support such a claim.

Which was forty four years ago when politics in the united states was less far partisan, and when elected officials were not openly out to get anyone and everyone that did not fall perfectly in party lines in a group-think mentality where holding a different idea made one the enemy. Such is no longer the case. And because of such, a constitutional convention will not come about with ease in a timely manner, and certainly not for the express purpose of trying to restrict legal firearms ownership.

 

Because everyones views and the views of all the states changed the moment a 5-4 paritsian supreme court decision comes out saying you must respect the right to own a gun. Yeah no, especally one as weak as to say no bans or classes of firearms but everything else works

The judicial branch exists to interpret law. The supreme court as written in the constitution is a court of case law not a constitutional court. Hell they didn't even have their own court house until the 1900s. Congress should act to revoke such power, but it seems they are to scared, the legislatures of the 1800s played with the judiciary as a political tool expanding contracting and suspending powers and the 2000s legislature should do the same.

I think judges who exersise powers not granted in the constitution should be removed and imprisoned not killed. They are a run away train.

https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/democracy/landmark_marbury.html

This shows that there was hesitation as far back as 1803

Um, I mean a constitutional amendment granting the judicial branch the power to over turn legislation contrary the the constitution. That would take less then a year, especially if a state challenges the authority something that has not happened since the civil war.

 

No, public utilities can not make such requirements.

 

I'm pro-gun. Nothing helps us more than the type of craziness he posts. I actually think he's pro-gun, and pretending to be anti-gun to show how irrational they can be.

 

No, I'm citing a formerly in place policy from the hoary past that I learned about in law school.

But hey, you feel free to be completely wrong, ok champ?

 

In law school ? Was it Trump U champeroone ?

 

You realize I'm not a Trump supporter so you lobbing that has literally no effect whatsoever?
Try to be more inventive

 

I suspect many of the students taken in were not Trump supporters. But they all were gullible and uninformed.

 

There it is, the inevitable Trump flame baiting and thread derailing.

 

So you're going to call an HBCU proctored entirely by Democrats (literally not one Republican in the admin. Or at least none that would admit to it. ) a Trump propaganda U eh?

Quite a bold strategy

 

After watching Trump’s deplorable conduct, ignorance of facts and total disregard for empathy needed for good governance, Trump deserves every bit of criticism he gets. The idea that Trump or anyone can act like a quintessential ****** and not to be treated the same, is really laughable. . Deal with it.

 

Yawn.

 

Trump isn’t pretending to be anything. He’s actually an ignoramus.