A little bit about our supreme court and corporate power
In case you did not see this, it is my Senator’s opening comments at the Gorsuch hearings. He sums up just what a 5/4 split court has been doing.
This is his discussion on Cspan about his book: Captured: The Corporate Infiltration of American Democracy
He’s right about the 2nd Amendment. The Miller(1939) decision makes clear that it is the ownership of current militia arms that is protected by the Second Amendment, not hunting rifles. (The M16/AR15 is not legal for deer in many states, because it is not powerful enough.)
However, he is dead wrong on the Ledbetter, Hobby Lobby, and Citizens United decisions. The Court simply ruled on what the law SAID. Congress changed the law to fix the hole revealed by Ledbetter, and they could do the same with the mistakes they made in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (written by Chuck Shumer) and the Campaign Finance Law. The first implicitly includes corporations in the definition of PERSON, and the second explicitly does so.
He’s also right about Roberts, that he has not “just [called] balls and strikes,” but made up complete nonsense to keep Obamacare alive.
It is clear that you should not play with guns or the Constitution. And spare me the “tell me I am wrong bs”.
You are. ON both counts.
No, you prove your assertions about the Supreme Court opinions, they are gibberish. I have tried before, but I just got more gibberish.
BTW, The AR 15 is not legal for hunting in some states, but it has nothing whatsoever to do with not “powerful enough”. It is plenty powerful and is now the preferred weapon for deer hunting in many states, and there are not many states left where it is illegal.
So there, I gave you one.
There are currently eight states where deer hunting with a .223 is illegal.
(Honestly, the .243 is marginal.)
But let’s look at the decisions.
Ledbetter v. Goodyear
The LAW said that “An individual wishing to bring a Title VII lawsuit must first file an EEOC charge within, as relevant here, 180 days ‘after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.’”
She did not do so, so lost her case. Congress changed the law to address this.
Burwell v. Hobby Lobby
Because Chuck Shumer did not redefine PERSON when he wrote the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the standard definition is in effect: “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, unless the context indicates otherwise… the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;” 1 U.S. Code § 1
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
Runs into similar problems. We should, however, change the Constitution to prohibit campaign spending or donations except by those who are registered to vote in the election which they are trying to influence.
U.S. v Miller
Miller lost because “it is not within judicial notice that [a sawed-off shotgun] is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.” Thus making clear that it is only weapons that ARE “part of the ordinary military equipment,” or which “could contribute to the common defense” are protected.
The ludicrous “it’s not a tax, so we can rule on it, but it IS a tax so it is constitutional,” does one better than Helvering, which relied on a “precedent” release minutes before, by overturning a prior ruling IN THE SAME RULING.
Then ruling that the subsidies applied to policies purchased through the FFM when the ACA, Sec. 38B, specifically says the subsidy applies to plans “enrolled in through an Exchange established by the State under 1311 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” just ignores that language completely, and applies the subsidy to those policies enrolled in through the FFM.
Its ok to hunt humans with though. I was more humane and used a 7.62 mm full metal jacket. I could reach out and touch someone at 500 yards with metal sights.
The AR 15 is basically a glorified shotgun and no, it is not always powerful enough, especially if the shell doesn’t impact correctly.
I don’t have one, as such a small caliber is not legal for deer or bear hunting here. So I cannot really comment on it. If I were to get something like that, it would be an AR-10 (the original, actually), which is a .308. For varmint hunting, I’d prefer a .22-250 bolt-action.
The reason to vote “no” on Neil Gorsuch is that he is NOT Merrick Garland.
ok . . .
Well, never thought I would see a comment section on Angry Bear discussing guns and what bullet kills better.
It is not a discussion. I am making fun of Warren. I am an X-Marine Sergeant as you might know from my previous comments. There are people who think this is fun and worthy or making a big deal of during particular times of the year. I do not hunt although I do target shoot. When ask if I hunted and what, I have always said people. It gets quiet then and I am left alone then, which I prefer.
They can keep their holidays, all the wars and medals in the world, etc. I would swap it all to have my friends back; Tim Gilson, Paul Placzek, Bobbie O’Million, etc. These were real people who I knew and grew up with when I was young. When it comes to this stuff, I like to be left alone.
“I was more humane and used a 7.62 mm full metal jacket.”
You used an FMJ only because the law required you too. They are less effective for killing than expanding bullets.
“I could reach out and touch someone at 500 yards with metal sights.”
Yes. My go-to for that would be my K-31.
This was really not a discussion. I do not need the details. I was poking fun at you. Be a gentleman and lets discuss something worthwhile as we are out of topic for this thread.
Warren’s right; I can’t believe they won’t let me have my self propelled 155 howitzer.
If you can bear it, who’s going to tell you you can’t?
Really, Warren? You think they won’t try to stop me?
Jack, if you could bear a self propelled 155 howitzer, I don’t think anyone would dare try.