Common sense question regarding gun control

Konono said:
Can you yell fire in a crowded theater?
Click to expand...
yes but if you are found to have incited a riot you'll not like the consequesces.
can you plink beer cans in your backyard with your .50 cal Colt ?
yes but if you dont have the required distances covered you'll not like the consequences.
you wont be convicted of speaking or keeping/bearing arms, those are protected rights.
have to remember that your rights end where my rights begin. we're all in this together.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Yes.
Click to expand...

LOL. Smartasses and the word "can". I bet your mom still pats you on the head.

And you absolutely free to do so? Is there are a first amendment right to yell fire in a crowded theater? Or is the first amendment limited?

I suspect you run back behind your mommies skirt.
 
Konono said:
LOL. Smartasses and the word "can". I bet your mom still pats you on the head.

And you absolutely free to do so? Is there are a first amendment right to yell fire in a crowded theater? Or is the first amendment limited?

I suspect you run back behind your mommies skirt.
Click to expand...

Yes, I can yell fire in a crowded theater.

I see now that you've got your answer, that you've decided that you needed to expand on it and hopefully not appear to be an idiot.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Here's what I don't get about all the rabid rhetoric by "gunners" (folk who are against ANY type of Federal regulations regarding weapons in the USA).....
Click to expand...

When you begin from an erroneous premise, of what prohibitive value does your question have? Is you proclaiming your closed-mindedness, your bias and prejudice, demonstrative of your ability to recognize (let alone discuss) "common sense" based questions?

Taichiliberal said:
Just asking.
Click to expand...

Yeah, right.

If you were "just asking" the derogatory comment and hyperbolic claims as to what gun rights people believe, would not have been any part of this OP or thread.

You are among the brainless leftist mob who "feel" their gun control support on an emotional level so the out of the box demonization and pigeon-holing any opponent into an indefensible position --before they even speak-- is needed by your shallow ego to prop-up your anti-intellectual positions.

So sad, and that you so profoundly delude yourself, that you are a deep thinker, is just hilarious.
 
Konono said:
Is speech the same thing as a firearm?
Click to expand...

Speech is certainly on par with the right to keep and bear arms.

There is no sliding scale of importance.

Those rights considered original and fundamental, having no aspect of them being conferred thus a fully retained right, are considered a "rational continuum" of liberty.

Konono said:
Where in the Constitution does it say this?
Click to expand...

You might refer to the 14th Amendment.

Konono said:
So you too believe it is ok to deny a class of people constitutional rights.
Click to expand...

It's settled that agents of the government are bound by the limits of their delegated powers.

The exercise of those powers in the execution of their duties is not an exercise of a "right", constitutional or otherwise.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Yes, I can yell fire in a crowded theater.

I see now that you've got your answer, that you've decided that you needed to expand on it and hopefully not appear to be an idiot.
Click to expand...

So that the fact you 'can' means it is protected? Is that what you are saying? Please be clear and stop being obtuse.
 
Celticguy said:
yes but if you are found to have incited a riot you'll not like the consequesces.
can you plink beer cans in your backyard with your .50 cal Colt ?
yes but if you dont have the required distances covered you'll not like the consequences.
you wont be convicted of speaking or keeping/bearing arms, those are protected rights.
have to remember that your rights end where my rights begin. we're all in this together.
Click to expand...

And background checks violate that how?
 
[=Abatis;1524435]Speech is certainly on par with the right to keep and bear arms.

There is no sliding scale of importance.

Those rights considered original and fundamental, having no aspect of them being conferred thus a fully retained right, are considered a "rational continuum" of liberty.
Click to expand...

Is speech regulated or not?
 
Konono said:
So that the fact you 'can' means it is protected? Is that what you are saying? Please be clear and stop being obtuse.
Click to expand...

Where did I say that, Legion?

You asked if I could do it and I said that Yes I could.
Instead of asking more questions, why don't you show me that I can't? :dunno:
 
Konono said:
Is speech regulated or not?
Click to expand...

Your boring argument is flawed.

Whatever regulation of speech you want to cite, they are liabilities one is exposed to for actual actions that can harm or actually harm others.

What you fail to comprehend is that legitimate laws restricting the right to be armed follow perfectly the exemplary 1st Amendment models, e.g., 'you can't yell fire in a theater'.

The laws against brandishing and threatening with a gun and laws against assault with a deadly weapon and attempted murder and homicide are in perfect unison with the 1st Amendment examples you would offer. Those laws are legitimate responses by society to specific illegitimate actions / uses of a protected interest.

Those specific prohibitions that implicate the 1st Amendment, (inciting, libel, slander, defamation, obscenity), because of the misuse of a protected interest, are narrow and has no effect on the ability to legitimately exercise the right, nor do those regulations inhibit or condition the simple possession and use of any protected ancillary items (your voice, paper, pens, paint & canvas, clay, computers, digital camera, recording device).

Please explain to me how specific gun rights regulations you would support, are comparable to regulated free speech.

It's your point after all . . .
 
While it has not been litigated, I suspect the court would find that driving is a right.
 
kaz said:
In general, no. But when we ceded the power to government to create roads, regulating them went with that. Are you seriously suggesting government can't make it illegal to drive on the left side of the road or let blind people drive? You can't half give government a right. They have the right to regulate the roads they are authorized to create.
Click to expand...
regulating 'rules' of the road, such as speed limits, which side to drive on, where stop signs and stop lights go are definitely within the power of the government to do. regulating who can and can't drive based upon obtaining a permission slip is not.

kaz said:
You realize that's fundamentally different too when we are talking about power ceded to government (roads) and power withheld from government (regulating guns), no?
Click to expand...
i realize no difference. maybe you can explain it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top