Page 1 of 35 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 511

Thread: texas court makes new law out of thin air, negates a right of the people

  1. #1 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,490
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default texas court makes new law out of thin air, negates a right of the people

    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...en&as_sdt=6,44

    open carry of long guns has been legal in TX for decades and while many cities have not liked it, they've had to deal with it. On occasion we'd end up with some idiot cop or another writing a disorderly conduct ticket, which usually gets thrown out because the language of the statute is too vague and doesn't describe activity that's disorderly. It simply states 'a manner calculated to alarm'..............and the US Supreme Court set precedent decades ago that the mere exercise of a right cannot be converted in to a crime...........well the TX criminal court of appeals just took that right away with the above ruling by redefining 'calculated to alarm' in to 'likely to alarm'.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  2. #2 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,960
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...en&as_sdt=6,44

    open carry of long guns has been legal in TX for decades and while many cities have not liked it, they've had to deal with it. On occasion we'd end up with some idiot cop or another writing a disorderly conduct ticket, which usually gets thrown out because the language of the statute is too vague and doesn't describe activity that's disorderly. It simply states 'a manner calculated to alarm'..............and the US Supreme Court set precedent decades ago that the mere exercise of a right cannot be converted in to a crime...........well the TX criminal court of appeals just took that right away with the above ruling by redefining 'calculated to alarm' in to 'likely to alarm'.
    Why is it you people can't recognize the fact that Constitutional rights can be regulated, that no right, none, are absolute, ever one can be, and are, regulated, simple fact. Carrying long guns in public can be legally regulated

  3. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to archives For This Post:

    Adolf_Twitler (07-19-2019), Cinnabar (07-18-2019), evince (07-19-2019), jimmymccready (07-18-2019), ThatOwlWoman (07-18-2019)

  4. #3 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Why is it you people can't recognize the fact that Constitutional rights can be regulated, that no right, none, are absolute, ever one can be, and are, regulated, simple fact. Carrying long guns in public can be legally regulated
    You mean like how you baby killers gladly accept laws regulating abortion?

  5. #4 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,490
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    You mean like how you baby killers gladly accept laws regulating abortion?
    false equivalency. and that's pretty ironic, you being an abortion supporter calling ME the babykiller LOL
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  6. #5 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    false equivalency
    Not based on his claim that rights aren't absolute.

  7. #6 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,490
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    Not based on his claim that rights aren't absolute.
    that would have to be MY claim, but that's not what I posted about
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  8. #7 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    52,291
    Thanks
    77,752
    Thanked 23,568 Times in 17,849 Posts
    Groans
    38,677
    Groaned 3,238 Times in 3,042 Posts
    Blog Entries
    8

    Default

    There are no limitations to the Second Amendment. There have been limitations wrongly placed on the Second Amendment.

    If the Founding Fathers had wanted limits on the Second Amendment, they would have placed them there.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Earl For This Post:

    Into the Night (07-18-2019), Truth Detector (07-18-2019)

  10. #8 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,960
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    You mean like how you baby killers gladly accept laws regulating abortion?
    Little clue for you "C," I don't support abortion, and last I knew it was heavily regulated

  11. #9 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    that would have to be MY claim, but that's not what I posted about
    I wasn't posting to you. I was addressing his claims that rights can be regulated and aren't absolute. The problem with his claim is that he's one of the first ones on this forum to bitch and moan if anything is done to regulate abortions.

  12. #10 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,960
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SmarterthanYou View Post
    false equivalency. and that's pretty ironic, you being an abortion supporter calling ME the babykiller LOL
    Not at all, you are implying some Constitutional right is being taking away from you and that that is illegal, but in reality it is anything but illegal, as I said, any of those rights can, and are, regulated

  13. #11 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Little clue for you "C," I don't support abortion, and last I knew it was heavily regulated
    Bullshit to both, Big N.

  14. #12 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    14,506
    Thanks
    2,892
    Thanked 9,834 Times in 6,110 Posts
    Groans
    422
    Groaned 710 Times in 658 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default

    The second amendment doesn't guarantee rights to all arms. It also doesn't give you the right to interrupt people's peaceful lives, just so you can flaunt your arms. Carrying a long gun doesn't fit the situation anyway. I'd love to see someone try, and do certain tasks lugging something like that along.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Jade Dragon For This Post:

    domer76 (07-18-2019)

  16. #13 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,490
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by archives View Post
    Not at all, you are implying some Constitutional right is being taking away from you and that that is illegal, but in reality it is anything but illegal, as I said, any of those rights can, and are, regulated
    if the state, or even the court, were using an actual gun law to do this, you MIGHT have a point. However, that is not what is happening here. The court is using a vague definition in a disorderly conduct statute to make people afraid to exercise a right in order to avoid the citation that they redefined.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

  17. #14 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    41,960
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 22,041 Times in 13,848 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 3,042 Times in 2,838 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Earl View Post
    There are no limitations to the Second Amendment. There have been limitations wrongly placed on the Second Amendment.

    If the Founding Fathers had wanted limits on the Second Amendment, they would have placed them there.
    Good ole "earl," still confused I see

    Every Amendment has limitations, and the Founding Fathers did set a requirement in the Second Amendment, I guess they didn't teach the prefatory clause where you went to school

  18. #15 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    61,490
    Thanks
    1,041
    Thanked 3,617 Times in 2,816 Posts
    Groans
    1,008
    Groaned 1,328 Times in 1,225 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CFM View Post
    I wasn't posting to you. I was addressing his claims that rights can be regulated and aren't absolute. The problem with his claim is that he's one of the first ones on this forum to bitch and moan if anything is done to regulate abortions.
    my bad and my apologies. I missed that it was you posting and thought it was archives.
    A sad commentary on we, as a people, and our viewpoint of our freedom can be summed up like this. We have liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, yet those very people look at Constitutionalists as radical and extreme.................so those liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans must believe that the constitution is radical and extreme.

Similar Threads

  1. Court: Texas can enforce more of 'sanctuary cities' law
    By Pappy Jones in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-26-2017, 05:04 AM
  2. APP - What if Texas just ignores the Supreme Court?
    By canceled.2021.3 in forum Above Plain Politics Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-01-2016, 10:18 AM
  3. Supreme Court strikes down Texas abortion access law
    By Leonthecat in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-27-2016, 06:50 PM
  4. Tom DeLay conviction overturned by Texas court
    By StormX in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-22-2013, 02:51 PM
  5. 'Next Bush' makes campaign filing in Texas
    By Cancel 2018. 3 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-09-2012, 01:35 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •