The NFL
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Da Geezer View Post(1) Kapture is right. It won't pass the Senate.
(2) The origin of the law is in the inability is citizen's of some states (PA for example) to drive their autos into NY and become a felon when they pass the state line. The US Constitution is about limiting the Federal government and protecting individual liberty.
(3) There is the "full faith and credit" clause in the Constitution that mandates that the several states fully enforce the laws of other states.
(4) as usual, you progs are always flipping the reasoning in the Constitution, and you want to impose it on the whole country if possible. What the Constitution says is that I may carry a weapon for self-defense, and if I want to carry it into NY City for protection, I can do that. I have a valid CCP in MI, and NY has to recognize it. As an aside, this whole full faith and credit matter is important to truck drivers because they want protection wherever they are.
But of course to you that means: take whichever state in the country has the weakest gun laws and impose those laws on every state in the country. Why isn't West Virginia obligated to enforce New York gun laws in that scenario?
I should add, it looks like this proposed bill would have compelled a few states (Wyoming & West Virginia among them) to require permits for concealed-carry for the first time.
- Top
Comment
-
If Hollywood had scripted the most stereotypical Alabama politician possible they would've fired the screenwriter who came up with Roy Moore
Moore said that all things considered, the last time America was great was back in the slavery days. Hes not necessarily praising slavery, mind you, but at least back then we still believed in family values, by God!
Most of the national coverage of Roy Moore’s effort to upset the establishment in his bid for Senate in Alabama has been viewed through the lens of the sexual abuse allegations against him – but there are a slew of other reasons why Republicans were uneasy with his candidacy before those revelations were known.
- Top
Comment
-
Reminds me when Limbaugh said about the days of slavery.
“I mean, let’s face it, we didn’t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I’m not saying we should bring it back; I’m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.”
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by WingsFan View PostReminds me when Limbaugh said about the days of slavery.
?I mean, let?s face it, we didn?t have slavery in this country for over 100 years because it was a bad thing. Quite the opposite: slavery built the South. I?m not saying we should bring it back; I?m just saying it had its merits. For one thing, the streets were safer after dark.?
The only source we?ve turned up so far that putatively documents this quote is the 2006 book*101 People Who Are Really Screwing America, which attributes it to Rush Limbaugh but itself cites no source. On his*program*of*12 October*2009, Limbaugh disclaimed this quote as a fabricated one:
- Top
Comment
-
(3) There is the "full faith and credit" clause in the Constitution that mandates that the several states fully enforce the laws of other states.
But of course to you that means: take whichever state in the country has the weakest gun laws and impose those laws on every state in the country. Why isn't West Virginia obligated to enforce New York gun laws in that scenario?
I should add, it looks like this proposed bill would have compelled a few states (Wyoming & West Virginia among them) to require permits for concealed-carry for the first time.
The problem is when a driver from a less oppressive state drives into a more oppressive state, not the reverse.
And all citizens of the US have the right to carry weapons for self-protection
- Top
Comment
-
Thank you Kapture1, after all these years that is probably 'Fake News'
First paper to run Limbaugh "slavery" quote issues retraction
But now the toothpaste is being squeezed back into the tube by the Post-Dispatch. In an Editor’s Note published today, the newspaper says that the quote in question “cannot be verified, and its use did not meet the Post-Dispatch‘s standards for sourcing.”
- Top
Comment
-
I don't understand why this concept is so difficult for you to understand. A NY driver drives into WV and the NY law applies (full faith and credit). Since NY law is more oppressive than WV law, the WV police officer has no reason to arrest or charge the NY driver.
Or perhaps a better example would be a medical marijuana state vs. non medical marijuana state. You need your gun for protection. You need medical marijuana to alleviate a medical condition. I'm fairly certain that non-marijuana States are under no obligation to not arrest possessors, even if legally obtained in another state.
That's federalism. The fact that Congress is stepping in very much proves the point that there is no such FF&C and, TBH, nor should there be absent federal legislation.Dan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by Da Geezer View PostI don't understand why this concept is so difficult for you to understand. .......
What this says to DSL is, look, you dumb fuck, why are you so fucking stupid .....
Never mind that the position you took in your own post regarding "Full Faith and Credit"..... is wrongly applied in this particular case.
Generally, I enjoy your posts. The ones that start out like this though I usually just scroll through them.Mission to CFB's National Championship accomplished. But the shine on the NC Trophy is embarrassingly wearing off. It's M B-Ball ..... or hockey or volley ball or name your college sport favorite time ...... until next year.
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by Da Geezer View PostI don't understand why this concept is so difficult for you to understand. A NY driver drives into WV and the NY law applies (full faith and credit). Since NY law is more oppressive than WV law, the WV police officer has no reason to arrest or charge the NY driver.
The problem is when a driver from a less oppressive state drives into a more oppressive state, not the reverse.
And all citizens of the US have the right to carry weapons for self-protection
I would say that if you believe one state's laws should be imposed on every state, then you cannot logically argue against a federal law regulating concealed carry on the basis of 'states rights' or 'Federalism'.
Additionally I'm not aware that concealed carry is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Gun ownership, sure.
- Top
Comment
-
I don't really like Andrew McCarthy and he's made it clear over the years that he despises Obama. This article should be read by all our Trump fans here. This is a very solid take on the 'unmasking controversy' and the newer 'Steele Dossier controversy'.
The kicker here is below but to summarize: Trump claims he is the victim of an FBI conspiracy where power was grossly abused. But as McCarthy points out, with a quick sweep of the hand, Trump could release all the information he'd need to totally vindicate himself and send dozens of Obama people to prison. He hasn't. McCarthy reasons that (unfortunately) the best explanation for why he hasn't is that the info WILL NOT vindicate Trump, will not show the criminality he claims exists, and that it's more useful politically to keep screaming about a conspiracy out to get you.
*******
Needless to say, if this is how it happened, the Trump administration would not want the information in the FISA application disclosed. To be sure, the information would not necessarily indicate there was any Trump-campaign collusion in Russian espionage. But it might show that (a) there were unsavory contacts between Trump associates and foreign government operatives; (b) there was enough FBI-verified information in the warrant application (which probably was not limited to the dossier?s allegations) for the FISA court to find probable cause to believe one or more Trump-connected people were acting as agents of a foreign power; and (c) parts of the dossier have been corroborated, which would destroy the Trump political claim that the dossier is a tissue of lies.
President Trump is uniquely positioned to reveal how the dossier was handled and what the FISA Court was told. As Congressman Jordan urges, Trump?s own FBI and Justice Department employees could easily let the Intelligence Committee examine any FISA applications derived from the dossier. Why doesn?t the president just order them to comply with Congress?s demand?
In the unmasking controversy, it seems Trump was more interested in politically exploiting the specter of abusive unmasking than in ordering the disclosure of what actually happened. Is the same thing true of the dossier? I don?t know why the FBI and Justice Department are stonewalling the Intelligence Committee. Suffice it to say, however, that the president could order disclosure if he wanted to. He hasn?t. If he persists in that posture, we have to assume he would prefer that we not know what the FBI told the FISA Court.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/454493/steele-dossier-fbi-trump-should-disclose-warrant-application
- Top
Comment
-
Originally posted by Da Geezer View PostThe problem is when a driver from a less oppressive state drives into a more oppressive state, not the reverse.Whatever...
- Top
Comment
-
Additionally I'm not aware that concealed carry is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Gun ownership, sure.
I don't really like Andrew McCarthy and he's made it clear over the years that he despises ObamaDan Patrick: What was your reaction to [Urban Meyer being hired]?
Brady Hoke: You know.....not....good.
- Top
Comment
Comment