Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Dr. Strangelove]

[crashcourse]

friggin election denier

Connecticut judge orders new mayoral primary after surveillance videos show possible ballot stuffing (msn.com)

people would never do illegal things to get there candidiate elected

NJ election fraud: New charges brought against two Democrats over mail-in ballots, registrations | Just The News

[Dr. Strangelove]

Israel has reportedly cut off north Gaza (and Gaza City)

Israel severs north Gaza from the rest of the strip - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

[Dr. Strangelove]

Minor heads up...besides being Election Day tomorrow the Supreme Court hears US v. Rahimi, one of the big 2nd Amendment cases this term.

Q: "Whether 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment on its face"

[Dr. Strangelove]

Early voting totals from the Ohio SOS

758,000 for the August special election

864,000+ for November.

[klondike]

friggin election denier

Connecticut judge orders new mayoral primary after surveillance videos show possible ballot stuffing (msn.com)

people would never do illegal things to get there candidiate elected

NJ election fraud: New charges brought against two Democrats over mail-in ballots, registrations | Just The News

Only reserved for Trump and HARBAUGH!!! to get busted. YOU KNOW THE RULES.

[Hannibal]

Early voting totals from the Ohio SOS

758,000 for the August special election

864,000+ for November.

I’d expect a bigger gap in favor of the November issue.

[CGVT]

A friend got this in the mail. Ha!

thumbnail_Screensho.jpg

[WingsFan]

Lots of people from Ohio come up here to buy, there is no doubt about that. Stores everywhere. Michigan sells an average of $276 million month as the nation’s second largest cannabis retail market only behind California.

[iam416]

Minor heads up...besides being Election Day tomorrow the Supreme Court hears US v. Rahimi, one of the big 2nd Amendment cases this term.

Q: "Whether 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(8), which prohibits the possession of firearms by persons subject to domestic-violence restraining orders, violates the Second Amendment on its face"

That's actually going to be fascinating oral argument and it's a fascinating issue -- writh respect to Constitutional rights, what level of proof is adequate to for the State to infringe those rights? The Court is fine with "beyond a reasonable doubt" and it's fine with certain demonstrably true red flag laws, but the standards to obtain dometic-violence restraining orders and the consistency with which they are issued make this a really interesting case.

[Hannibal]

There ain't much due process for a restraining order. I'm good with restricting gun access to people who commit violent felonies, but you need to have a jury or a plea deal to establish that. Anyone can get a restraining order.

I understand the reasoning behind not wanting domestic abusers to have guns, but the reality is that you have to prove that the abuse occurred via some sort of due process. I don't think that this is a gray area. If somebody can take away your right to bear arms in self defense without proving that you did anything, then they can take away other rights too.

[Hannibal]

A friend got this in the mail. Ha!

thumbnail_Screensho.jpg

Heh heh. I like it!

[iam416]

There ain't much due process for a restraining order. I'm good with restricting gun access to people who commit violent felonies, but you need to have a jury or a plea deal to establish that. Anyone can get a restraining order.

I understand the reasoning behind not wanting domestic abusers to have guns, but the reality is that you have to prove that the abuse occurred via some sort of due process. I don't think that this is a gray area. If somebody can take away your right to bear arms in self defense without proving that you did anything, then they can take away other rights too.

Yeah, I think that's where the Court ends up.

[Hannibal]

Of course, the Liberal judges will side with the restrictions. They could not possibly care less about the Constitution and actual civil rights.

[iam416]

I wouldn't be surprised if it's 7-2. I'll know after the hearing.

I could envision a scheme where it's something a like a "restraining order +" -- you got a restraining order and he was arrested or you got a restraining order and you had a separate "gun" hearing to prove up an actual assault (as opposed to, say, stalking). I think reasonable people could probably agree on something less than criminal due process -- maybe -- but, their has to be a clear process that both affords the defendant a chance to be heard and is narrowly tailored to serve the interests of the state. And I don't think this is anywhere close to that.