collapse

Author Topic: State of the Union Address 2012  (Read 2366 times)

mandrina

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 890
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2012, 08:29:07 am »
Quote from: MadZealot;40981
Darn that pesky Constitution.



And darn those pesky Supremes for upholding it.

 
really, it depends on the supreme court.  They don;'t always uphold what each group thinks is what the constitution says.  there does seems to be alot of interpretation in that document.
Katrina

"I have a bad feeling about this."  Every good guy in the Star Wars saga, and an occasional bad guy as well.

Smokebender

  • Sr. Apprentice
  • ****
  • Join Date: Jan 2012
  • Posts: 93
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #16 on: January 31, 2012, 12:09:55 pm »
Quote from: mandrina;41011
really, it depends on the supreme court.  They don't always uphold what each group thinks is what the constitution says.  there does seems to be alot of interpretation in that document.


Agreed. It seems some wish to play with words not unlike Mr. Clinton did when his response what, "That depends on the meaning of the word is."

In my mind it also follows another pesky rule we live under,,,, the majority has the final say,,, and the majority are legal gun owners.
For human folly is without limit though society does much to
disguise its darker side. Cynicism, sadness or laughter is the
magician\'s privilege. -  Peter Carrol / Liber Null

Altair

  • Adept Member
  • ********
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Location: New York, New York
  • Posts: 2839
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 266
  • Fly high and make the world follow
    • View Profile
    • Songs of the Metamythos
  • Religion: tree-hugging pagan
  • Preferred Pronouns: he/him/his
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2012, 12:26:06 pm »
Quote from: Smokebender;41039
In my mind it also follows another pesky rule we live under,,,, the majority has the final say,,,


Actually, no. The founders were very aware of the possibility of "tyranny of the majority"--a form of mob rule where an unpopular minority has laws unjustly targeted at them. (What if the 99% voted to confiscate all the money of the top 1% and give it away? Majority has the final say...right?)

So they built certain protections of fundamental rights into the Constitution, things a majority can't trample on simply by enacting a law. That's where our Bill of Rights and Equal Protection clause in the Constitution come in. One of the most important jobs of the Supreme Court is to examine laws to make sure they don't violate those protections of fundamental rights, and if they do, declare those laws unconstitutional, making them null and void.

Of course, there's a lot of room for interpretation, fundamental rights can come into conflict with one another, etc. The system hasn't always worked. (The internment of Japanese Americans during WWII being on of the most heinous examples in living memory.) But that's how the system is designed, anyway.
The first song sets the wheel in motion / The second is a song of love / The third song tells of Her devotion / The fourth cries joy from the sky above
The fifth song binds our fate to silence / and bids us live each moment well / The sixth unleashes rage and violence / The seventh song has truth to tell
The last song echoes through the ages / to ask its question all night long / And close the circle on these pages / These, the metamythos songs

mandrina

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 890
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2012, 04:24:42 pm »
Quote from: Altair;41042
Actually, no. The founders were very aware of the possibility of "tyranny of the majority"--a form of mob rule where an unpopular minority has laws unjustly targeted at them. (What if the 99% voted to confiscate all the money of the top 1% and give it away? Majority has the final say...right?)

So they built certain protections of fundamental rights into the Constitution, things a majority can't trample on simply by enacting a law. That's where our Bill of Rights and Equal Protection clause in the Constitution come in. One of the most important jobs of the Supreme Court is to examine laws to make sure they don't violate those protections of fundamental rights, and if they do, declare those laws unconstitutional, making them null and void.

Of course, there's a lot of room for interpretation, fundamental rights can come into conflict with one another, etc. The system hasn't always worked. (The internment of Japanese Americans during WWII being on of the most heinous examples in living memory.) But that's how the system is designed, anyway.


 f'ex, there are those who are convinced that to bear arms is in a mitilia point of view, that's what the founders meant.  So if you weren't part of a militia, you shouldn't be entitled to carry a gun.  OF course, everyone on the frontier would be be defacto part of a militia, since they were in danger of being attacked, but nowadays, most of us aren't in a position of being in danger of the Comanches, or the mexican Army, etc. so we then should be part of the national guard or state militia,  or whatever in order to bear arms.  I;m not arguing this, I'm just pointing out there are actually somewhat legitimate other reading of the amendment.
This is not the interpretation of the present court, obviously.
Katrina

"I have a bad feeling about this."  Every good guy in the Star Wars saga, and an occasional bad guy as well.

Owl

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 587
  • Country: 00
  • Total likes: 24
    • View Profile
  • Religion: Other
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2012, 04:49:43 pm »
Quote from: mandrina;41067
f'ex, there are those who are convinced that to bear arms is in a mitilia point of view, that's what the founders meant.  So if you weren't part of a militia, you shouldn't be entitled to carry a gun.  OF course, everyone on the frontier would be be defacto part of a militia, since they were in danger of being attacked, but nowadays, most of us aren't in a position of being in danger of the Comanches, or the mexican Army, etc. so we then should be part of the national guard or state militia,  or whatever in order to bear arms.  I;m not arguing this, I'm just pointing out there are actually somewhat legitimate other reading of the amendment.
This is not the interpretation of the present court, obviously.


And if they were to change the interpretation, would they do house to house searches?  I ask this because of the ~20 guns currently in this house, all are inherited but one. The only gun we have that was bought by one of us (the SO's ex harassed him into selling all his others) is the SO's black powder rifle he uses for hunting.  I think it would be a bit of a logistical nightmare to make all guns illegal in this country.
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

mandrina

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 890
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2012, 05:52:39 pm »
Quote from: Owl;41069
And if they were to change the interpretation, would they do house to house searches?  I ask this because of the ~20 guns currently in this house, all are inherited but one. The only gun we have that was bought by one of us (the SO's ex harassed him into selling all his others) is the SO's black powder rifle he uses for hunting.  I think it would be a bit of a logistical nightmare to make all guns illegal in this country.

 
it might be, like i said, I wasn't going to argue this, maybe they would grandfather in all the ones already bought or owned, I don't know, But the point is, there are often more than one legit interpretation of the amendments, and the court changes enough so that the present interpretation may change.  Slavery was once part of the constitution.  Women didn't have the right to vote under the constitution (or at least wasn't anything but local or state rights) and that changed.
Katrina

"I have a bad feeling about this."  Every good guy in the Star Wars saga, and an occasional bad guy as well.

Owl

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 587
  • Country: 00
  • Total likes: 24
    • View Profile
  • Religion: Other
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #21 on: January 31, 2012, 06:04:20 pm »
Quote from: mandrina;41083
it might be, like i said, I wasn't going to argue this, maybe they would grandfather in all the ones already bought or owned, I don't know, But the point is, there are often more than one legit interpretation of the amendments, and the court changes enough so that the present interpretation may change.  Slavery was once part of the constitution.  Women didn't have the right to vote under the constitution (or at least wasn't anything but local or state rights) and that changed.


Very true - and I wasn't trying to argue.  I just had a moment of "OMG how could they make this work in this country?"  A country with a totalitarian government, much easier.  Here?  I know there are areas where many people don't have guns in their house, but the area I live in is one where a goodly percentage hunt - and so have guns (and/or hunting bows).  I could see all these good all boys wouldn't take kindly to it.
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

Altair

  • Adept Member
  • ********
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Location: New York, New York
  • Posts: 2839
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 266
  • Fly high and make the world follow
    • View Profile
    • Songs of the Metamythos
  • Religion: tree-hugging pagan
  • Preferred Pronouns: he/him/his
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #22 on: February 01, 2012, 09:07:04 pm »
Quote from: mandrina;41083
But the point is, there are often more than one legit interpretation of the amendments, and the court changes enough so that the present interpretation may change.  Slavery was once part of the constitution.  Women didn't have the right to vote under the constitution (or at least wasn't anything but local or state rights) and that changed.


You're right, Mandrina, that interpretations change over time...but I should point out that the examples you gave didn't involve a change in interpretation. For both slavery and women's suffrage, change came through amending the Constitution.

A better example of change of interpretation would be segregation; 1954's Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education ruled that "separate but equal" public schools were unconstitutional, overturning the Supreme Court's 1896 decision in Plessy v. Ferguson, which gave the green light to gov't segregation.
The first song sets the wheel in motion / The second is a song of love / The third song tells of Her devotion / The fourth cries joy from the sky above
The fifth song binds our fate to silence / and bids us live each moment well / The sixth unleashes rage and violence / The seventh song has truth to tell
The last song echoes through the ages / to ask its question all night long / And close the circle on these pages / These, the metamythos songs

Altair

  • Adept Member
  • ********
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Location: New York, New York
  • Posts: 2839
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 266
  • Fly high and make the world follow
    • View Profile
    • Songs of the Metamythos
  • Religion: tree-hugging pagan
  • Preferred Pronouns: he/him/his
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #23 on: February 01, 2012, 09:15:17 pm »
Quote from: Owl;41084
Very true - and I wasn't trying to argue.  I just had a moment of "OMG how could they make this work in this country?"


Well, I don't know that the goal of gun control is to take every weapon away from law-abiding citizens. Most of the attempts I've heard involve mandatory background checks, waiting periods, restrictions on where they can be carried without a permit, banning particular *kinds* of guns (f'ex, automatic assault weapons, which have absolutely no hunting applications), etc.

Going door to door to pry hunting rifles from folks' cold, dead hands (to borrow a phrase from the late Charlton Heston) isn't the concept, I don't think.
The first song sets the wheel in motion / The second is a song of love / The third song tells of Her devotion / The fourth cries joy from the sky above
The fifth song binds our fate to silence / and bids us live each moment well / The sixth unleashes rage and violence / The seventh song has truth to tell
The last song echoes through the ages / to ask its question all night long / And close the circle on these pages / These, the metamythos songs

sailor

  • Grand Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 1505
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #24 on: February 01, 2012, 09:26:43 pm »
Quote from: Altair;41182
Well, I don't know that the goal of gun control is to take every weapon away from law-abiding citizens. Most of the attempts I've heard involve mandatory background checks, waiting periods, restrictions on where they can be carried without a permit, banning particular *kinds* of guns (f'ex, automatic assault weapons, which have absolutely no hunting applications), etc.

Going door to door to pry hunting rifles from folks' cold, dead hands (to borrow a phrase from the late Charlton Heston) isn't the concept, I don't think.

 
And making sure only the "right" people get a permit to carry.  That was the push behind "shall issue" laws.  Police chiefs had to provide a specific reason a specific person was being denied a permit.

MadZealot

  • Adept Member
  • ********
  • Join Date: Nov 2011
  • Location: So Cal
  • Posts: 2437
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 143
  • Eye yam tu papi.
    • View Profile
  • Religion: Bitter Clinger. Sith Lord.
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #25 on: February 01, 2012, 09:43:21 pm »
Quote from: Altair;41182
... particular *kinds* of guns (f'ex, automatic assault weapons, which have absolutely no hunting applications), etc. ....

You can hunt with an assault rifle-- in fact, a lot of 'em will use the same type and caliber of round as a 'hunting' rifle.  It may not be the weapon's primary (or best) function, but it can be done.  You might not be able to drop a deer at range with an AK-47, but you'd have a decent shot with a M-16 or AR-15.

Gun laws, especially governing those of the 'assault' variety, can be goofy.   For instance, the AR-15 is classified as an 'assault' rifle and is thus illegal here in CA.  It has a bayonet lug, so it is classed as an assault rifle because you can potentially mount a shiny pointy knife at the business end, not because of its automatic fire rate or 30+ round capacity.  Goofy, innit?
« Last Edit: February 01, 2012, 09:44:10 pm by MadZealot »
Superman is uncircumcised. Change my mind.

Owl

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 587
  • Country: 00
  • Total likes: 24
    • View Profile
  • Religion: Other
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #26 on: February 02, 2012, 02:53:36 pm »
Quote from: Altair;41182
Well, I don't know that the goal of gun control is to take every weapon away from law-abiding citizens. Most of the attempts I've heard involve mandatory background checks, waiting periods, restrictions on where they can be carried without a permit, banning particular *kinds* of guns (f'ex, automatic assault weapons, which have absolutely no hunting applications), etc.

Going door to door to pry hunting rifles from folks' cold, dead hands (to borrow a phrase from the late Charlton Heston) isn't the concept, I don't think.

 
Most (if not all) states require such checks already for handguns.  But it is not followed up on when someone dies or does a private party sale.  And rifles and shotguns are a whole other category with (as far as I know in all states) no checking at all.  What I am trying to point out is that while they can tighten up the laws on new purchases from dealers, it is pretty difficult to track anything else.  And there are a lot of guns in private hands in this country.  

If true gun control is wanted, they need to control the sale of bullets as well - and of the equipment to load your own rounds - or anything that is done is only a partial fix.  I am not arguing about the whole 'cold, dead hands' attitude, I was just extrapolating the ramifications of really trying to get a handle on guns in this country.  Hell, I have a step-father who would have trouble shooting someone who broke into his house to kill him who has his grandfather's (as in never been registered) 22 pistol.  

I just have a mindset that tends to look for problems in plans, and this is a problem that has always stared me in the face.  Realistically, it would be like trying to control who has fine china in their house.  I have never bought any, but as the oldest granddaughter on both sides of my family I have a china cabinet full of truly antique Limoges Haviland china.  If it was being tracked by the government, they would have a hell of a time finding out about it.  My father's mother bought her's from a family in the Depression who needed money and my grandfather was working.  My mother's mother inherited hers from both her mother and her mother in law.  There is no obvious trail.  And I know people who have guns the same way.  How do you control that?

This is not a gun nut saying "you cannot take my guns away", this is just someone looking at the problem and not seeing anything proposed as actually moving toward a complete solution.  I don't have an answer - except maybe controlling the ammunition.  Perhaps an license to buy ammunition?  But just registering handguns?  It's only a drop in the bucket.
Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

sailor

  • Grand Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Posts: 1505
  • Total likes: 0
    • View Profile
Re: State of the Union Address 2012
« Reply #27 on: February 02, 2012, 03:19:15 pm »
Quote from: Altair;41182


Going door to door to pry hunting rifles from folks' cold, dead hands (to borrow a phrase from the late Charlton Heston) isn't the concept, I don't think.

 
The word you are looking for to describe any such effort is Bleeding Kansas.

o/~ Mine eyes have seen the ending of a nation's unity/
 I'm watching corpses stacking up like cordwood on TV/
What I've been saying all along, the rest of you now see/
The country's gone to hell! Gory, gory, bloody murder! Gory, gory, bloody murder! Gory, gory, bloody murder! The country's gone to hell! o/~ """

Tags:
 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
28 Replies
2280 Views
Last post November 19, 2012, 12:19:22 pm
by veggiewolf
6 Replies
615 Views
Last post November 18, 2012, 08:12:38 pm
by SkySamuelle
22 Replies
2351 Views
Last post May 14, 2014, 08:04:12 am
by RandallS
2 Replies
1040 Views
Last post August 22, 2015, 09:50:28 am
by Materialist
3 Replies
1206 Views
Last post December 29, 2016, 07:33:44 pm
by Sefiru

* Who's Online

  • Dot Guests: 35
  • Dot Hidden: 0
  • Dot Users: 3
  • Dot Users Online:

* Please Donate!

The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.

* In Memoriam

Chavi (2006)
Elspeth (2010)
Marilyn (2013)

* Cauldron Staff

Co-Hosts:
LyricFox & Randall

Senior Staff:
Darkhawk

Message Board Staff
Board Coordinator:
Sunflower

Assistant Board Coordinator:
Aster Breo

Board Staff:
Allaya, Chatelaine, HarpingHawke, Jenett, Morag, rocquelaire, Sefiru

Discord Chat Staff
Chat Coordinator:
Morag

Reserve Staff:
Aisling

Cauldron Council:
Bob, Catja, Emma-Eldritch, Fausta, Jubes, Kelly, Phouka, Sperran, Star, Steve, Tana

Cauldron Assistants
[Non-Staff Positions]

Site Assistants
[Non-Staff Positions]
Webmaster:
Randall