- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 1/30/19 at 4:31 pm to kingbob
quote:
That's the problem with rights. Everyone's rights always intersect.
That's why the constitution outlines the rights the government protects. My right to personal property does not infringe on your right to own a gun. Just don't come on my property. Does that make sense?
Posted on 1/30/19 at 4:31 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
Your right to carry firearm is not above my right as a business owner to not allow fire arms.
I ignore that nonsense.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 4:32 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
No, the government should not.
So, you move into a house. The neighbor moves into a house next door and opens a saw-mill that runs 24/7. The sawmill destroys the value of your property so you can't sell it for what you owe on the open market, and you cannot sleep soundly in your home. You're cool with there being no remedy for you? That's some hard core property rights. If that is really true, then I commend you for your intellectual honesty. Please remind me to buy a house next door to yours for my band to practice at and throw house party shows.
You're invited any time, provided you pay the cover charge that helps pay for the beer.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 4:52 pm to kingbob
quote:
You're cool with there being no remedy for you?
I'm cool with the remedy not being the government. Holy shite, how much do you rely on the government in your life. you're starting to sound like a Lib.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 4:53 pm to 10MTNTiger
quote:
The Dakotas are one of the last bastions of rational political thought in this country.
There and the Mountain West areas like Montana, Wyoming, Idaho tend to be pretty libertarian conservative
I think Ben Garrison lives in Montana
Good people up there
Posted on 1/30/19 at 5:22 pm to LSUconvert
quote:
I'm cool with the remedy not being the government.
So what is the remedy? How do you prevent your neighbor from injoining on your right to enjoy your property without both the government and without injoining on his rights to enjoy his own property? Absent government and its criminal and civil court system, how do you settle such disputes? How do you even claim ownership of property? Who enforces that claim? Is property owned by whomever holds it? What if they took it from you by force?
I am not trying to be facetious, I am just trying to get to the root of your property law philosophy.
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 5:24 pm
Posted on 1/30/19 at 6:52 pm to kingbob
quote:
So what is the remedy?
He doesn’t care. As long as his rights are preserved and others rights are squashed, he’s good. His are more important than yours.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 9:11 pm to troyt37
quote:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Because if it doesn't, it's a bunch of unconstitutional bullshite, and it matters not who uttered it, thought it, legislated it, upheld it, or found it constitutional.
Seems constitutional to me and history supports that view
Posted on 1/30/19 at 9:14 pm to bmy
quote:
Seems constitutional to me and history supports that view
Seems like an assload of infringement to me, but I’m not a troll.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 9:25 pm to bmy
quote:
Seems constitutional to me and history supports that view
You repeatedly cherry-pick the Heller decision yet obviously have no clue on the history or the actual application when it comes to the topic of CCW permitting. The Heller decision was narrowly tailored and as such does not prevent future courts from ruling that CCW permitting is unconstitutional. I know, you're a LWNJ and poorly educated, but you shouldn't try so hard to prove it before the public here.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 9:52 pm to Wtodd
quote:
The South Dakota House of Representatives passed legislation Tuesday intended to abolish the need to acquire a concealed carry permit in order to carry for self-defense.
I lived in South Dakota for about 12 years and had a permit to carry there. At the time I got my permit, you went to the Sheriff's office to apply. After I filled out the application, the Deputy told me to wait. He walked into the office and came back 10 minutes later with a temporary permit for me. I received the official permit about 30 days later. At the time, there was a $10 application fee.
I was lucky enough to meet Ted Nugent at a local store - he was in the area to do some hunting. We talked for about 10 minutes and he autographed my CCW.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 10:08 pm to 10MTNTiger
Wyoming is probably the reddest state there is. They were the first states to threaten the federal govt when they were flirting with obma’s Gun control. The state could legally arrest them if they tried to take guns from Wyoming ppl.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 10:18 pm to The Maj
quote:
Wow, look everyone, another retarded alter has shown up to bestow wisdom upon us...
Whose alter are you?
Not an alter. I think you misunderstood what I was saying.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 10:21 pm to Wtodd
"right to bear arms"
until they change that, I say, carry on!
until they change that, I say, carry on!
Posted on 1/31/19 at 8:31 am to Clames
quote:
You repeatedly cherry-pick the Heller decision yet obviously have no clue on the history or the actual application when it comes to the topic of CCW permitting. The Heller decision was narrowly tailored and as such does not prevent future courts from ruling that CCW permitting is unconstitutional. I know, you're a LWNJ and poorly educated, but you shouldn't try so hard to prove it before the public here.
"For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues"
Posted on 1/31/19 at 8:44 am to The Boat
quote:Went to the pet store the other day waiting to check out. Lady in back of me was packing heat on her hip. I just had to strike up a conversation. It was VERY awkward. It was 5% 2A and 95% trying to get attention.
Needing a concealed carry permit while not needing one for open carry makes no fricking sense.
Posted on 1/31/19 at 8:50 am to bmy
quote:
"For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues"
As if activist judges are a new thing? The fact that 19th century courts took it upon themselves to redefine "infringe", ignored it, or simply used verbal diarrhea to circumvent the Constitution doesn't change the fact that any such ruling, law, or legislation is by definition unconstitutional.
..."the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Posted on 1/31/19 at 9:05 am to White Sauce bbQ
quote:
Off topic, but what’s the appropriate age to give my first born boy a gun? He’s turning 10 in March.
I got my first gun, a Daisy BB gun, at 8.
If he’s got a good head on his shoulders, it’s time.
Posted on 1/31/19 at 9:41 am to TygerTyger
I got my first gun, a 20 ga single shot shotgun, at 10.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News