- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- 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
SCOTUS rejects gun rights appeal
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:18 pm
quote:
The Supreme Court is rejecting yet another call to decide whether Americans have a constitutional right to carry guns with them outside their homes.
The justices on Monday left in place an appeals court ruling that upheld the San Diego sheriff's strict limits on issuing permits for concealed weapons.
The high court decided in 2008 that the Constitution guarantees the right to a gun, at least for self-defense at home.
But the justices have refused repeated pleas to spell out the extent of gun rights in the United States, allowing permit restrictions and assault weapons bans to remain in effect in some cities and states. More than 40 states already broadly allow gun owners to be armed in public.
The high court also turned away a second case involving guns and the federal law that bars people convicted of crimes from owning guns.
The Trump administration had urged the court to review an appellate ruling that restored the rights of two men who had been convicted of non-violent crimes to own guns.
The federal appeals court in Philadelphia ruled for the two men. The crimes were classified as misdemeanors, which typically are less serious, but carried potential prison sentences of more than a year. Such prison terms typically are for felonies, more serious crimes.
The administration says that the court should have upheld the blanket prohibition on gun ownership in the federal law and rejected case-by-case challenges.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor said they would have heard the administration's appeal.
LINK
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 12:25 pm
16
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:19 pm to boogiewoogie1978
frick. Meant to upvote. My bad!
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:19 pm to boogiewoogie1978
Every man deserves a sword.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:19 pm to boogiewoogie1978
So...they're erring on the side of state's rights?
I'm for it.
I'm for it.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:21 pm to ChopBlockOclock
quote:
frick. Meant to upvote. My bad!
Refresh, upvote, refresh. If you feel like it that is all you need to do
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 12:22 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:21 pm to Eli Goldfinger
The states' rights argument falls apart if you believe in a very expansive 2A
But I'm not particularly bothered by this from a practical perspective
It might be more troubling if the overall state trend wasn't massively on our side (pro-2A)
But I'm not particularly bothered by this from a practical perspective
It might be more troubling if the overall state trend wasn't massively on our side (pro-2A)
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:21 pm to boogiewoogie1978
I found this more interesting:
quote:
The high court also turned away a second case involving guns and the federal law that bars people convicted of crimes from owning guns.
The Trump administration had urged the court to review an appellate ruling that restored the rights of two men who had been convicted of non-violent crimes to own guns.
The federal appeals court in Philadelphia ruled for the two men. The crimes were classified as misdemeanors, which typically are less serious, but carried potential prison sentences of more than a year. Such prison terms typically are for felonies, more serious crimes.
The administration says that the court should have upheld the blanket prohibition on gun ownership in the federal law and rejected case-by-case challenges.
Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor said they would have heard the administration's appeal.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:22 pm to boogiewoogie1978
fine with that
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:22 pm to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
So...they're erring on the side of state's rights? I'm for it.
Anyone moving to IL or CA should know what they're getting into.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:22 pm to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
So...they're erring on the side of state's rights?
I'm for state's rights as well, and believe that originally states were supposed to be able to have their own gun laws if they wished. But that bridge was crossed when the 14th Amendment passed.
This reeks of cowardice from the Court, to me.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:30 pm to boogiewoogie1978
Poorly written article. Sounds like the SC allowing a municipal sheriff to take a person's 2A right. If so, they're wrong. Don't see how a city official can take someone's Constitutional rights. A whole state shouldn't be able to either, but should at least be considered. A city? Nope.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:34 pm to boogiewoogie1978
I carry everywhere regardless. I don't get my rights from the Supreme Court
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:42 pm to the808bass
quote:
Anyone moving to IL or CA should know what they're getting into.
Yep. If people are dumb enough to limit their own ability to defend themselves, them let them have at it. What pisses me off is that these states want federal money for all of their progressive BS.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:43 pm to texag7
quote:
I carry everywhere regardless. I don't get my rights from the Supreme Court
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:48 pm to texag7
It's a bold move Cotton...
Call me crazy, but I don't believe you. More power to you if you are, but you should fully expect things to turn to shite in a hurry sometime when you stroll into the wrong courthouse, bank, school, sporting venue, concert arena, etc.
Call me crazy, but I don't believe you. More power to you if you are, but you should fully expect things to turn to shite in a hurry sometime when you stroll into the wrong courthouse, bank, school, sporting venue, concert arena, etc.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:49 pm to boogiewoogie1978
Very disappointing. Considering the right to bear arms is an expressly enumerated right in the Constitution's BOR, it should have the clarity it deserves preserved for all people of the United States.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:50 pm to Eli Goldfinger
quote:
So...they're erring on the side of state's rights?
I'm for it.
States only get that power if not mentioned in the Constitution....only arms are mentioned in the Constitution so it shouldn't be an issue of states rights. This basic human right to defense specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
This post was edited on 6/26/17 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:57 pm to Junky
quote:
States only get that power if not mentioned in the Constitution....only arms are mentioned in the Constitution so it shouldn't be an issue of states rights. This basic human right to defense specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
You're right, but kind of bass ackwards. All power rests with the states, unless specifically enumerated to the federal government in the Constitution. It's one of the biggest clusters we have going in the government, IMO.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 12:58 pm to boogiewoogie1978
‘Concerned citizen’ accused of shooting man fleeing police
A man was arrested after he shot someone who was attempting to elude officers early Saturday in Covington, police said.
Marcus Allan Pitts, 46, of Covington, was charged with aggravated assault after he fired a shot at Terence Lee Lennox, 33, of Lawrenceville, police Capt. Craig Treadwell said.
Officers administered first aid to Lennox, who was taken to Grady Memorial Hospital, where he was in critical condition.
Pitts, whom Treadwell described as a “concerned citizen” with no known criminal record, apparently saw Lennox running on foot from a crash scene and tried to block him with his truck. Pitts then got out and fired a handgun.
“I think he thought he was trying to stop the guy from fleeing from the accident or our officers,” Treadwell said. “We still don’t know why, but he fired his handgun and struck the suspect in the neck.”
Suspect sped off from Covington PD, crashed nearby, ran across shopping plaza. Another citizen tried to stop, then shot him, and now in jail
Police know of no connection between the men, Treadwell said.
The shooting took place in the vicinity of Newton Plaza on U.S. 278.
The incident began about 7 a.m. when police received calls about a white SUV driving erratically on Ga. 36 headed toward the Covington Square, police said.
Officers attempted to locate the driver in the vicinity of Church and Monticello streets, but they weren’t chasing him, Treadwell said.
Nevertheless, “he took off in his SUV and crashed into another vehicle at Highway 278 and Pace Street.”
No one in the other vehicle was injured, Treadwell said. Lennox then took off on foot toward Newton Plaza, where the encounter with Pitts occurred.
Pitts is being held in the Newton County Detention Center.
“He’s going to have to articulate to the court why he used deadly force and it will be up to the court to decide” his fate, Treadwell said.
The injured man was shot in the neck."
LINK
That guy really messed up. Deadly Force is a defense only if you or someone are in imminent fear of your life.
A man was arrested after he shot someone who was attempting to elude officers early Saturday in Covington, police said.
Marcus Allan Pitts, 46, of Covington, was charged with aggravated assault after he fired a shot at Terence Lee Lennox, 33, of Lawrenceville, police Capt. Craig Treadwell said.
Officers administered first aid to Lennox, who was taken to Grady Memorial Hospital, where he was in critical condition.
Pitts, whom Treadwell described as a “concerned citizen” with no known criminal record, apparently saw Lennox running on foot from a crash scene and tried to block him with his truck. Pitts then got out and fired a handgun.
“I think he thought he was trying to stop the guy from fleeing from the accident or our officers,” Treadwell said. “We still don’t know why, but he fired his handgun and struck the suspect in the neck.”
Suspect sped off from Covington PD, crashed nearby, ran across shopping plaza. Another citizen tried to stop, then shot him, and now in jail
Police know of no connection between the men, Treadwell said.
The shooting took place in the vicinity of Newton Plaza on U.S. 278.
The incident began about 7 a.m. when police received calls about a white SUV driving erratically on Ga. 36 headed toward the Covington Square, police said.
Officers attempted to locate the driver in the vicinity of Church and Monticello streets, but they weren’t chasing him, Treadwell said.
Nevertheless, “he took off in his SUV and crashed into another vehicle at Highway 278 and Pace Street.”
No one in the other vehicle was injured, Treadwell said. Lennox then took off on foot toward Newton Plaza, where the encounter with Pitts occurred.
Pitts is being held in the Newton County Detention Center.
“He’s going to have to articulate to the court why he used deadly force and it will be up to the court to decide” his fate, Treadwell said.
The injured man was shot in the neck."
LINK
That guy really messed up. Deadly Force is a defense only if you or someone are in imminent fear of your life.
Posted on 6/26/17 at 1:00 pm to troyt37
quote:
Don't see how a city official can take someone's Constitutional rights.
It isn't the city, is it? It's the elected county sheriff.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News