Social WR Lounge v247: I ain't no sexy boy. I don't dance, son.

Status
Not open for further replies.
RerouteToRemain said:
lUx7cXz.jpg
Click to expand...


Looks like 5 of the same gun and one that appears a little too assaulty.


<DisgustingHHH>
 
Falsedawn said:
A single manly tear just left my eye. I bet your range days are expensive as shit.
Click to expand...

Unless you are ripping. 22s who's range days aren't. 10mms and 5.56 now is brutal. I used to think shooting my .44 like 15 years ago was bad ....now I long for those days.
 
Falsedawn said:
A single manly tear just left my eye. I bet your range days are expensive as shit.
Click to expand...

I don't like to think about it. Luckily I had a pretty good stock so I haven't really had to buy much at today's outrageous prices. But but even then match .223, 6.5 and 300 subs wasn't really cheap to begin with. I miss being able to buy and shoot 500+ rounds of different stuff for under $100.
 
Trotsky said:
Right. That's not freedom of association.
Click to expand...

Not since it's outlawed. But make no mistake the law curtails the business' ability to exercise their free speech by refusing to serve people they find objectionable.

But let's go with you're line of thinking. Then a platform censoring communications among it's users isn't a matter of exercising their free speech, since it's a business endeavor.
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
That's a long-winded way of saying the commerce clause trumps the 1st Amendment. Thanks. I disagree. Here's why.



The press is comprised of commercial entities. Therefore the government can stifle their speech. Churches take donations (i.e. are paid for their services), therefore teaching certain beliefs can be regulated.

Guns are bought and sold, therefore they can be banned.

Defense lawyers charge money, therefore they can be denied practice.

None of that makes sense. What makes sense is that the government was tasked with certain duties, regulating commerce among the states being one of them. Then Amendments were added as limits on their authority to execute those tasks. So in my view the commerce clause doesn't allow freedom of the press to be infringed. Surprised you don't see it that way.
Click to expand...

Guns are banned because the second amendment allows guns to be regulated. Where the limit is is the major thrust of second amendment law.

Lawyers can be denied practice because they're accredited by state bars. Whether or not they charge money is largely immaterial to their licensing status.

The bits about churches and the press are irrelevant because the constitution also explicitly protects those rights. Which is why they're discussed as first amendment issues, and not issues of interstate commerce. You're tying multiple threads together that just aren't valid. Beyond that, you're getting away from public accommodations and why we restrict discrimination against the protected classes to begin with. It's not a speech issue, it's a trade issue. Dollars and cents. Unless your words are literally gold, they're not related.

All of these things coexist at once. This is the reason the 13th Amendment doesn't contradict the Fugitive Slave Clause. And in fact, we still use the Fugitive Slave Clause in justifications of judicial punishment, as that was an explicit exception in the 13th amendment.
 
Falsedawn said:
Look man, I hawk ammo drops. 9mm out the MPX is a good day. Just pick up a thousand here and there and the stream is steady. :p
Click to expand...

I don't have a 9mm cuz I had to assert me rugged individualism and get a pistol that makes big bang bang. Don't regret it cuz I love that gun but often times I think having a 9mm would make life so much easier
 
Falsedawn said:
Look man, I hawk ammo drops. 9mm out the MPX is a good day. Just pick up a thousand here and there and the stream is steady. :p
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the ammo drops now go for 4-5 times what they used to. But that's why you buy thousands when it's cheap.
 
Falsedawn said:
Guns are banned because the second amendment allows guns to be regulated. Where the limit is is the major thrust of second amendment law.

Lawyers can be denied practice because they're accredited by state bars. Whether or not they charge money is largely immaterial to their licensing status.

The bits about churches and the press are irrelevant because the constitution also explicitly protects those rights. Which is why they're discussed as first amendment issues, and not issues of interstate commerce. You're tying multiple threads together that just aren't valid. Beyond that, you're getting away from public accommodations and why we restrict discrimination against the protected classes to begin with. It's not a speech issue, it's a trade issue. Dollars and cents. Unless your words are literally gold, they're not related.

All of these things coexist at once. This is the reason the 13th Amendment doesn't contradict the Fugitive Slave Clause. And in fact, we still use the Fugitive Slave Clause in justifications of judicial punishment, as that was an explicit exception in the 13th amendment.
Click to expand...

The 2nd doesn't say guns can be regulated. It refers to the need for a well-regulated militia, and explicitly says the right of the people to keep an bear them shall not be infringed (i.e. arms are explicitly protected). And SCOTUS has agreed people have a right to firearms so there is indeed a limitation placed on the government's use of the commerce clause (i.e. the 2nd ultimately trumps the CC).

Deny all defense lawyers the ability to practice and see if any Constitutional issues are raised.

The 1st explicitly protects freedom of speech, which is curtailed when you're forced to accommodate clientele you find objectionable.

Yes, these things coexist, but it's based on society and law picking and choosing one of the other as a matter of desire and convenience. So in the end, regardless of how much you like my use of the CRA to demonstrate that fact, you agree that a business' right to free speech is far from absolute. Thanks. :)
 
The Diplomat said:
If your weapons and ammo were made illegal, would you give them up?
Click to expand...

Nope. For one, even the dumbshit 94 ban included a grandfather clause. So sure I wouldn't be able to get anything new, but the odds of ammo drying out is slim. I'd probably start reloading.

If they tried confiscation, they'd see a firestorm like never before. And I know how that sounds given the topic, but I mean public opinion lol. We gotta figure out the mass shooting thing, banning guns is a stupid solution to a serious issue. No understanding, just feels. You could take every gun off the street and crazy people would still exist.

Gutter Chris said:
I don't have a 9mm cuz I had to assert me rugged individualism and get a pistol that makes big bang bang. Don't regret it cuz I love that gun but often times I think having a 9mm would make life so much easier
Click to expand...

Say it with me.

Pistol. Caliber. Carbine.

<PlusJuan>
 
Cubo de Sangre said:
The 2nd doesn't say guns can be regulated. It refers to the need for a well-regulated militia, and explicitly says the right of the people to keep an bear them shall not be infringed (i.e. arms are explicitly protected). And SCOTUS has agreed people have a right to firearms so there is indeed a limitation placed on the government's use of the commerce clause (i.e. the 2nd ultimately trumps the CC).

Deny all defense lawyers the ability to practice and see if any Constitutional issues are raised.

The 1st explicitly protects freedom of speech, which is curtailed when you're forced to accommodate clientele you find objectionable.

Yes, these things coexist, but it's based on society and law picking and choosing one of the other as a matter of desire and convenience. So in the end, regardless of how much you like my use of the CRA to demonstrate that fact, you agree that a business' right to free speech is far from absolute. Thanks. :)
Click to expand...

Ok, you're disagreeing with Scalia here about the second amendment, not me. And I don't even like that guy.

The rest of it is you arguing with yourself again. Big woof.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,275,208
Messages
57,974,559
Members
175,888
Latest member
whatsername

Share this page

Back
Top