In response to:

Ban This! Ban That! Ban This and That!

HenryAgincourt Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:07 AM
The Supreme Court says YOU have a right to a handgun and rifle/shotgun! So wrote Justice Antonin Scalia in a majority opinion. This decision did NOT include assault rifles! Every right, even the First Amendment has limits (one can't yell "fire" in a theater) ... SO let's have reasonable limits on the Second Amendment for the good of our whole society! The NRA speaks for the gun industry; the society they are creating for us is the need for every school to be GATED with police protection (we are there now!), then every theater, then every church, then every mall, and so on! What a beautiful America, as 11000 innocent Americans die every year on the blood altar of NRA paranoia! Not much different than the Aztecs!
Ms Kelly Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 4:36 PM
Henry: YOU ARE WAY OFF BASE!

The Bill of Rights does not guarantee a Constitutional right to anything. The Constitution makes it clear that the rights of the people and of the states are innumerable. Too many to number. The Bill of Rights came AFTER the Constitution, and was a further RESTRICTION upon the GOVERNMENT.

The framers of the Constitution thought these rights of the people (articles 1 through 10) were so important that the people would not trust the government unless there were SPECIFIC limitations placed upon the government regarding these specific rights. (Read the preamble to the Bill of Rights).

Therefore: The government has NO AUTHORITY to change what was specifically written as a LIMIT to their authority.
Ms Kelly Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 4:20 PM
Everyone needs to read up on the “fire in a crowded theatre” reference. It is almost always misquoted and misunderstood. Firstly, there is no such law against “specifically” shouting fire in a theatre. The original quote was from Oliver Wendell Holmes: “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man FALSELY shouting fire in a theater and causing a panic”, but Holmes was only theorizing not referencing a specific law.

The Supreme Court case for which he was arguing for a limit to free speech was later overturned, so the “fire” reference really has no validity in case law, and people who use it really just show their ignorance.
Texas Chris Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 2:22 PM
Not being able to yell fire in a theater isn't about infringing on free speech, it's about preventing property damage and personal injury.

There are laws against murder and assault. These laws cover crimes committed with guns, yes even "assault rifles". But banning any type of gun is not about preventing crime, it is about enabling FUTURE crime, to be committed by those who are banning guns today.
Dorothy152 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 11:21 AM
If we can't control our borders who in heck thinks any 'ban on any gun' will really be enforced and prevent sick and evil men from obtaining them.
JamesB2 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 11:13 AM
Uh, you can yell fire in a movie theatre...if there IS a fire!
bbtruth Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:27 AM
The morally relative society people like you are creating is the reason we need protection. Moron.
Joe840 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:21 AM
Because there is no such thing as a semi-automatic assault rifle, it doesn't matter, and your point is moot. Let's also not forget that firearms are used more than 2.5 million times a year to PROTECT lives and property.

Finally, how do you know those 11,000 Americans who die are "innocent"? How many are criminals and gang-bangers?
Genehorn Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:01 AM
The law is that the right to bear arms shall not be infringed and there you are infringing.
talltexanoilfieldtrash Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 9:38 AM
Please furnish proof that your assertions are true. Do not tell me to "look it up", I know you are full of bull excrement.
Proof, or shut up.
talltexanoilfieldtrash Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:25 AM
evie,
I was replying to henryagincourt, I do not know why it took so long and got so far down the page.
I know it looks like I was answering waynesteapartyworld, but I wasn't.
waynesteapartyworld Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 9:35 AM
The NRA didn't bring us a society that requires schools to be gated and with police protection...That society was brought to us by progs and libs and their bankrupt political quasi-religion of irresponsibility and narcissism.
fiddlerMO Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 9:35 AM
We should, obviously, ban assault stones, knives, sticks, fingernails, pencils, and all hard or pointy objects.
And, we can let Pelosi, Reid, and their cronies determine what is "assault" and what isn't by simply looking at it and determining if it looks scary!!
fiddlerMO Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 9:38 AM
PS; Freedom comes with a price. A price that was paid by our fathers and fore-fathers. I thank them every day.
Duke Nuk'em Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:58 AM
US v. Miller says otherwise!
bigwookiee Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:40 AM
I own 2 identical Ruger mini-14 ranch rifle.
One look just like this one:
http://www.ruger.com/products/mini14RanchRifle/models.html
The other one looks like this:
http://www.midwayusa.com/product/948821/archangel-sparta-pistol-grip-collapsible-stock-system-ruger-mini-14-mini-30-synthetic-black?cm_vc=subv1251383

Why is one an assault weapon and the other one not? Became the ban has nothing to do with how dangers a weapon is but what they can get the ignorant to believe and what will generate the most money for the politicians and there special interest groups. If they cared about gun violence then why has Obama justice department all but abandoned project exile, which went after criminals who used guns?
John_G Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:24 AM
You say the 1st Amendment has limits, but can you point it out to me in the text of the Amendment? Additionally, what if the theater is on fire?
LAPhil Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:42 AM
I've often thought about that too, John.
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:56 AM
Your right to swing your arm stops where another person's nose begins as he has the right to not have his nose smashed (unless he volunteers to do so in a MMA fight).

Where two rights collide, reasonable rules and limitations apply. In the case of theater, your freedom of speech to Falsely yell fire endangers others and effects another's business. Plus it is on another persons property.

Think of it like this, if you live on a 100 acre plot, you can get a bullhorn and give a political speech at 3 AM, but in my neighborhood of 1 acre plots, if the neighbor does that he interferes with my right to get a night sleep

But if my neighbor owns an AR-15 it in no way interferes with my right. We have laws that restrict his USE of the weapon
Tinsldr2 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 9:00 AM
Continued from my above post

But if my neighbor owns an AR-15 it in no way interferes with my right. We have laws that restrict his USE of the weapon

Nobody wants my neighbor shooting targets in his back yard with an Ar-15 in a neighborhood of 1 Acre plots but he can do so on a 100 acre plot.

And certainly he can not use it in a crime.

But while falsely yelling fire in a theater or using a bullhorn at 3 AM do others harm and clash with their rights, merely OWNING a weapon does not harm anyone else.
Fuzzy2 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 9:05 AM
evie10 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:01 AM
astoundingly concise and clear - well-said.
Happy Jake Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:26 AM
Actually the "shouting fire" rule includes the word "unnecessarily" and is commonly interpreted with the phrase "to induce panic." It is not the speaking of the word fire, it's the intent to induce panic and, thereby, cause personal injury and property damage.

If there IS a fire, you SHOULD yell "fire!"
Happy Jake Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:29 AM
Is perjury covered? Is conspiracy (to commit a crime) covered? Is incitement to riot covered? Is the communication of a threat covered? Is extortion coverd? Is communicating national security secrets to a foreign power covered?
Happy Jake Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:33 AM
Rights presume responsibility. Publicly disagreeing with the President on Social Security is an absolute right, even publicly insulting him (even though it's uncivil). But some acts which include speech or the press as a necessary component are and should be illegal.

Do you propose that the First Amendment's "Free Exercise" clause allows followers of the Aztec religion to conduct human sacrifice? The principle is the same.
Kali_Fred Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 10:35 AM
Besides, why should it be illegal to shout fire in a theater? Is it illegal to shout "poison gas" in a theater? Or crazed killer in the house in a theater?
Texas Chris Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 2:23 PM
Exactly. As long as he keeps his bullets off your property (including your body) he is well within his rights.

Well stated.
nimh2 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:22 AM
An "assault rifle" IS a "rifle". What's your point??
evie10 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 9:59 AM
especially in response to this article - nothing to say on sports and betting on them?
Timothy32 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 8:18 AM
You cannot just Fire a gun in a Movie theater eather. So what is the point of the example of cannot yell fire in a movie theater. Do you ban the word fire from peoples lexacon. Its an obsurd reference.

I like to bet on sports. Having a stake in the game, even if it's just five bucks, makes it more exciting. I also like playing poker. "Unacceptable!" say politicians in much of America. "Gambling sometimes leads to 'addiction,' destitute families!"

Well, it can.

So politicians ban it. It's why we no longer see a poker game in the back of bars. Half the states even ban poker between friends -- though they rarely enforce that.

After banning things, politicians' second favorite activity is granting special privileges to a few people who do those same things -- so big casinos flourish, and most...