|
I think it came up in the bad thread, but it's worth noting that the Michigan bill everybody is up in arms about doesn't actually ban sodomy. A bill relating to animal abuse registries required some standardization of related statutes, so the existing sodomy law (which sadly is also the bestiality law) was slightly amended to remove a couple 'shalls' and change the tense of the verbs. Some low info lefty news source misunderstood the amendment and now everybody is getting it wrong. I mean, Michigan has a horrible legislature that is constantly doing dumb poo poo. But this time we didn't actually do it!
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:53 |
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Meanwhile, in WV -- Republicans passing bullshit amendments to avoid dealing with the budget is the legislative equivalent of a college fraternity going on a week-long bender instead of studying for final exams. Gravel Gravy posted:You don't speak for SAs convicted felons. Yeah, TCC is over that way. | | V Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Feb 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:I'm sure this has been brought up before, but wouldn't the "well regulated" portion of the 2nd Amendment authorise rules and limits on the use, carry, ownership, etc of of arms? I don't know, have there ever been laws that openly framed themselves as regulating the unorganized militia?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:loving disgusting. Just as the Founding Fathers intended!    E: America is loving retarded.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
The FBI is currently looking into regulating a militia in Oregon. It's not going well. For the militia.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:06
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:I'm sure this has been brought up before, but wouldn't the "well regulated" portion of the 2nd Amendment authorise rules and limits on the use, carry, ownership, etc of of arms? The argument is that that's not actually part of the law, just a reasoning put in. So if the Amendment said "The right for people to bear arms in a well regulated militia shall not be infringed", then you would have a stronger case. As it stands, the bit about a "well regulated militia being necessary" just shows why the founders thought it should be included. You might think this is the same thing, but there's a lot of precedent for the founders wanting something and still erring on the side of individual rights in order to secure that goal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:06
|
|
Chantilly Say posted:I don't know, have there ever been laws that openly framed themselves as regulating the unorganized militia? I don't know, I thought it raised an interesting question though, but one that had probably been considered already.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The argument is that that's not actually part of the law, just a reasoning put in. So if the Amendment said "The right for people to bear arms in a well regulated militia shall not be infringed", then you would have a stronger case. My issue with this reading is that the same people who argue that it's not a literal requirement, only break away from their literal reading of the thing when it suits their purposes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:09
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:I don't know, I thought it raised an interesting question though, but one that had probably been considered already. The answer depends on the make up of the SCOTUS at the time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
axeil posted:reposting in the hopes it can get more discussion, the US water system is in deep, poo poo with multiple cities having Flint-level badness in their pipes. Well poo poo. Is this one of those things one could filter at home or are those not sturdy enough to handle lead? As someone who pretty exclusively drinks tap water all these articles about the terrible water system are more than a little disconcerting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
Relentlessboredomm posted:Well poo poo. Is this one of those things one could filter at home or are those not sturdy enough to handle lead? As someone who pretty exclusively drinks tap water all these articles about the terrible water system are more than a little disconcerting. Filtering can help, but the biggest problem is that most of the midwest has basically a completely broken infrastructure that needs completely replaced.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:17
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The argument is that that's not actually part of the law, just a reasoning put in. So if the Amendment said "The right for people to bear arms in a well regulated militia shall not be infringed", then you would have a stronger case. Right, but at the time of its writing "bear arms" didn't mean "owning a gun," it meant "serving in a militia."
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Filtering can help, but the biggest problem is that most of the midwest has basically a completely broken infrastructure that needs completely replaced. So all we need to do is raise taxes to fix it, right? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:24
|
|
|
Kro-Bar posted:So all we need to do is raise taxes to fix it, right? Fixing the US infrastructure is like a 10 trillion dollar proposition at this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:25
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Fixing the US infrastructure is like a 10 trillion dollar proposition at this point. I can think of at least one place to scrounge up some cash
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
baw posted:Happy Budget Day! The cover image of the budget this year is a picture of Denali. Trollbama strikes again!
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
There's certainly some wasteful spending we could do without, but why should we define budget fights on where to cut? Shouldn't we, if we're actually liberals be redefining the narrative on terms of how to raise revenues?
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
Joementum posted:The cover image of the budget this year is a picture of Denali. I wish we would have gotten Trollbama for all 8 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Fixing the US infrastructure is like a 10 trillion dollar proposition at this point. I sure am glad we spent so much money on the Iraq War and developing the F-35 instead of American infrastructure. Military budgets über alles! 
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:33
|
|
|
Your Dunkle Sans posted:I sure am glad we spent so much money on the Iraq War and F-35 instead of American infrastructure. We started loving this up in 80's. Also if you're going to bitch about military boondoggle, let me point you to the F22.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
AdmiralViscen posted:Right, but at the time of its writing "bear arms" didn't mean "owning a gun," it meant "serving in a militia." I'm seeing many conflicting viewpoints on that matter. It is worth noting though that it's not just "bear arms", it's "keep and bear arms". It's not quite as old as the Founders, but the Dredd Scott case seems to indicate that it would be a personal right: quote:[If negroes were civilians,] It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right...to keep and carry arms wherever they went.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
AdmiralViscen posted:Right, but at the time of its writing "bear arms" didn't mean "owning a gun," it meant "serving in a militia." Yeah but also at the time "militia" meant "me and all the other white men in town" so this is not the best precedent to draw on
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Right but it's in context of arms being useful in various forms and that the difference between a civilian arm and a military arm was almost non-existent. And at any rate, the constitution was written by a bunch of dudes who didn't think anyone other than their fellow rich white men should vote, so I am not really sure why we should remain so committed their vision.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Also if you're going to bitch about military boondoggle, let me point you to the F22.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:And at any rate, the constitution was written by a bunch of dudes who didn't think anyone other than their fellow rich white men should vote, so I am not really sure why we should remain so committed their vision. The Founders were awful but quite a bit of their "vision" that we're committed to is just random bullshit that's been attributed to or fundamentally linked to them to justify instituting policies and then never, ever changing them. (Cue CivilReligionChat)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
KOTEX GOD OF BLOOD posted:There may not be a clear reason for its existence, but at least it's not a flying turd? I mean, it's my understanding that it's a good plane. http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/23/politics/f22-plane-isis/ http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/77-billion-22-raptor-fleet-grounded-indefinitely/story?id=13545306 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor#Operational_problems
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:loving disgusting. gentlemen we must pass without delay the Dump Wheelbarrows Full of Guns Every Dang Place Act, which will reduce crime and make families safer by literally flooding our fair state with loaded weapons *bangs hand on podium emphatically; hand is clearly fused with a gun like in that Videodrome movie*
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I wish we would have gotten Trollbama for all 8 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Personally I think the "2nd is about militia's and only militias" argument is a double edged sword. I could easily see such an interpretation used to expand gun rights by the simple argument that if the people need to serve in a militia then it doesn't make sense to deny them arms of military value. Edit: I think this actually came up in one of the cases that tested the original 1934(?) NFA where there was a challenge to it revolving around a SBR Shotgun "Sawed off shotgun". The Court upheld the law in part because shotguns were not in common use in the military at the time. This suggests that had they been in common use that it would have been ok. Numlock fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Feb 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
Oh, I almost forgot! We're going to pass drug testing for welfare! Welcome to WV, where we're literally always behind the loving times.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Oh, I almost forgot! We're going to pass drug testing for welfare! Worked in Florida
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Filtering can help, but the biggest problem is that most of the midwest has basically a completely broken infrastructure that needs completely replaced. It might solve the red state issue of no taxation and no representation if everyone has to flee to the cities to get non fatal water. But there's only a few places I know of that have a very basic plan for maintaining their water system let alone keeping it working in the future. (Seattle, protect the salmon)
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Right but it's in context of arms being useful in various forms and that the difference between a civilian arm and a military arm was almost non-existent. Heretic! Seriously though you're completely right. Sometimes it feels like a rewriting of the constitution is the only way our country doesn't continue circling the drain but then I stop and think about the people that would be responsible for drafting something at a new Constitutional Convention and then I start fantasizing about going and living in the woods forever
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Numlock posted:Personally I think the "2nd is about militia's and only militias" argument is a double edged sword. I could easily see such an interpretation used to expand gun rights by the simple argument that if the people need to serve in a militia then it doesn't make sense to deny them arms of military value. At the time the Bill of Rights was passed it was legal for private citizens to own the latest in military hardware so therefore I should be able to protect my house with a minefield
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Right but it's in context of arms being useful in various forms and that the difference between a civilian arm and a military arm was almost non-existent. Guess who supports most of the lobbying and financial power that directs legislative change and the SuperPACs that keep politicians in office? I'm sure you know the answer already in your heart.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
RuanGacho posted:It might solve the red state issue of no taxation and no representation if everyone has to flee to the cities to get non fatal water. Rural areas don't have complex water systems though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Yeah, in my experience it's mostly well. Not sure about the rural west and those water projects.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:http://wvmetronews.com/2016/02/08/house-passes-permitless-conceal-carry-bill/ I got relatives there who were all ready carrying illegally. This is going to be fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I wish we would have gotten Trollbama for all 8 years. I genuinely believe Obama, as a relatively inexperienced senator turned President, still had a romantic and idealized view of Congress and what the relationship between said Congress and the Presidency should look like (ie majestic grand-bargains and Wilsonian idealism in rhetoric). It wasn't until well into his second term that Obama seemingly dawned to the reality of today's Congress under his tenure (eg Eric Cantor's "we will thwart Obama's every move from the word 'Go.'" since Obama's first term) as well as the hosed up poo poo that Congress refused and was unable to act on (eg the Aurora, CO and Sandy Hook Elementary shootings, etc) and finally decided to himself "You know what? gently caress this poo poo." A bit too little, too late, but still a welcome change. Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 18:09 on Feb 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 01:53 |
|
|
The purpose of the second amendment was to make sure individuals had access to weapons and knew how to use them. It was both intended as and written as an individual right to prevent the federal government from disarming the population. The language "to bear arms (for the common defense)" was explicitly rejected by the Senate. The problem is that this individual right is now completely irrelevant to the present time and the present debate (e.g. unrestricted use of semi-automatic weapons for purposes of individual self-defense). The problem is not that it has been warped from its intended meaning, but that it desperately needs to be updated, much like many of the restrictive and lovely parts of the Constitution already have been.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2016 18:04
|
|
