Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Donald Trump's Weekend Gaffes: Accidentally Endorses Biden, And More
Humor by Curt_Anderson     February 25, 2024 6:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (2 comments) [45 views]


Republicans are terrible at investigations and prosecutions.
Government by Curt_Anderson     February 25, 2024 3:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Curt_Anderson (7 comments) [74 views]


TAFKAP is going to fight this, but here's the reality
Disney by oldedude     December 25, 2023 8:54 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (5 comments) [139 views]


Obsequious Sen. Graham (R-SC) booed by South Carolina Republicans
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 24, 2024 7:03 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (5 comments) [45 views]


Clueless Sen. Tuberville 'running in circles' in response to IVF question
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 23, 2024 12:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (6 comments) [88 views]


Disney Stock Jumps on “Epic” Quarter
Disney by Indy!     February 24, 2024 10:55 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (10 comments) [67 views]


Trump’s new appeal to Black voters: I am a criminal too!
Crime by Curt_Anderson     February 24, 2024 9:08 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Ponderer (9 comments) [102 views]


South Carolina primary vote count:
Politics by HatetheSwamp     February 25, 2024 3:52 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: (0 comments) [17 views]


You don't have to be crazy to attend CPAC ...okay, you pretty much do.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 24, 2024 10:45 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (10 comments) [98 views]


Matt Gaetz says his GOP colleagues pushing the now indicted "highly credible confidential" source were a little "over-sauced".
Politics by Curt_Anderson     February 22, 2024 10:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (9 comments) [130 views]


News selectors, pages, etc.
It keeps getting crazier
By islander
February 3, 2023 12:11 pm
Category: News

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post

SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)


Whew !!! It keeps getting crazier and crazier !!!

"A federal law that prohibits people subject to domestic violence restraining orders from possessing firearms is unconstitutional, a conservative-leaning appeals court ruled Thursday.

The ruling is the latest significant decision dismantling a gun restriction in the wake of the Supreme Court’s expansion of Second Amendment rights last year in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen decision.
The 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals said that the federal law targeting those believed to pose a domestic violence threat could not stand under the Bruen test, which requires that gun laws have a historical analogy to the firearm regulations in place at the time of the Constitution’s framing.

“Through that lens, we conclude that (the law’s) ban on possession of firearms is an ‘outlier’ that our ancestors would never have accepted,” the 5th Circuit said."


Cited and related links:

  1. cnn.com

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "It keeps getting crazier ":

  1. by HatetheSwamp on February 3, 2023 1:10 pm

    isle,

    I read the story on the decision from Fox as well as CNN...to avoid the progressive sermonizing.

    I have two thoughts:

    1. I am a tad disturbed. My guess is that such a law could be constitutional were it rewritten with more recent jurisprudence in mind. The law was written at a time when wacked liberal Supreme Court decisions were par for the course. And, I agree that the DOJ should appeal.

    2. Nevertheless, the truth is that the US Bill of Rights actually guarantees radical liberties to our citizens. The days of Big Brother are gone for the moment. This Supreme Court, rightly pb thinks, seems to be determined to stand for individual liberty in the way that our Founders envisioned life in this constitutional republic. What the people who wrote the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights designed was scandalous across much of the world beginning 247 years ago...as it is today among America's progressives.

    foxnews.com


  2. by oldedude on February 3, 2023 1:37 pm
    This is a feature the left is yapping about, and I've explained. Right now, it's a good example of what I was talking about. AND this isn't an argument.

    The issue with the New York "law" is that it does not have due process in the language. Example; Your ex wife thinks you have guns (or in NY, knives, slingshots, BB guns, etcetcetc). She wants to get back at you. She's a psycho that was shown in divorce court. The judge then agreed with you on that. She goes to a different court and says you have "weapons" and you "feel" her life is endangered. All good so far, and I think we both agree that something should be looked into. Correct?

    This law says that the court can act without any process of notifying the perp (you), you now have court proceedings without you being informed and having the right to defend yourself. Full stop.

    Obviously, if you are involved in a case, but it hasn't gone to court, you won't know. This is different. The court has found you guilty based on suspicion without you being able to defend yourself. That's a violation of the 4th, 5th, and 6th amendment.

    The easy fix on this is to require the perp (you) to be picked up (if necessary), or to appear in court. If you don't appear (FTA) a warrant for your arrest can be produced by the court. If you do appear, the charges will be filed and you have the right to an attorney, etc.

    IF the judge feels you are a threat, prosecution can file the motion for restraining order.

    All they forgot is telling the perp (you) this is going on. If that changes, most gun owners I know are in support of the law.



  3. by oldedude on February 3, 2023 2:03 pm
    Isle (et.al.)- Match Lead's and my comments together. His was a perfect segway to mine. I tried not to be too long though.


  4. by islander on February 3, 2023 2:50 pm

    This has to do with the constitutionality of a law prohibiting someone from possessing a firearm if that person has been issued a restraining order for domestic violence for as long as that order is in force.

    I’m a gun owner who supports the second amendment. I also support such a sensible jaw and do not for one moment think such a law is unconstitutional.



  5. by oldedude on February 3, 2023 3:36 pm
    This has to do with the constitutionality of a law prohibiting someone from possessing a firearm if that person has been issued a restraining order for domestic violence for as long as that order is in force.

    I've been keeping up on a few of the gun laws that have been working their way through the courts. NY being one of them.

    I know what the NY law says. I've read it. I also know what the lawsuit is about. What you're saying isn't the whole story. It's a fabrication instilled on web sites to make you do exactly what you did. I been told much the same thing. Thus, I chose to actually read the law and the lawsuit.

    These laws will all be changed. I'm hoping sooner rather than later. I too, believe the victim MUST be protected. I believe that a protection order can be given without an illegal search and seizure based on hearsay or suspicion and without exigent circumstances. This does that, but it violates the constitution. Fix it and I'm good with the law and will actively support it.


  6. by islander on February 4, 2023 6:11 am

    The situation is exactly as I described it.

    "In certain circumstances, New York prohibits a person subject to a domestic violence protective order or an ex parte domestic violence protective order (the "respondent") from having a firearms license, and requires the revocation of any existing firearms license in the name of the respondent. More specifically, when a domestic violence protective order is issued, the court must revoke a license, order the respondent ineligible for a license and order the immediate surrender of any firearms owned or possessed by respondent, if the court finds that the conduct leading to an order of protection involved:

    - Infliction of physical injury;
    - The use or threatened use of a deadly weapon; or
    - Behavior constituting a violent felony offense.


    When a temporary order of protection is issued to protect a victim during a pending criminal action, or in a family court proceeding prior to a final protective order, a court must suspend a firearm license, order the respondent ineligible for a license and order the immediate surrender of all firearms possessed or owned by the respondent, if the court has good cause to believe that the respondent:

    - Has a prior conviction of a violent felony;
    - Has previously willfully failed to obey a prior order of protection, and the failure involved the infliction of physical injury, the use or threatened use of a deadly weapon, or behavior constituting any violent felony offense; or
    - Has a prior conviction of stalking in the first, second, third or fourth degree.


    In addition, a court issuing a domestic violence protective order or a temporary order of protection or finding that a respondent has willfully failed to obey a domestic violence order of protection must revoke or suspend the respondent's firearms license, order the respondent ineligible for a future license, and order the immediate surrender of all firearms owned or possessed by the respondent, if the court finds a substantial risk that the respondent may use or threaten to use a firearm unlawfully against the person(s) for whose protection the order was issued.

    Read the NY laws involving domestic violence and firearms in the link below...I fully support them.

    giffords.org


  7. by HatetheSwamp on February 4, 2023 6:24 am

    I just love progressive hate-driven dementia:

    The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision on Thursday allowing alleged domestic abusers to keep their guns is perhaps the most radical Second Amendment decision in the history of the federal judiciary. It is not, however, a surprise. Justice Clarence Thomas’ opinion in last year’s Bruen case invited lower courts to strike down any gun restrictions that “our ancestors would never have accepted.” This standard is infinitely malleable given the hopeless ambiguities in the historical record. But even where the record is clear, Thomas’ test leads to heinous results given that the “ancestors” in question were often violently racist and misogynistic white men. As the 5th Circuit tacitly acknowledged, “our ancestors” would “never have accepted” disarming domestic abusers because they did not believe domestic violence was a crime.

    Progressive love for America can be so poignant.
    slate.com


  8. by oldedude on February 4, 2023 6:53 am
    Good catch.


  9. by HatetheSwamp on February 4, 2023 7:45 am

    OD,

    Here's what I notice about the progressive SwampMedia:

    It stopped at some point in the past reporting news. It does two things these days. One is preach. The other is vent it's anger and hate. The "'Thomas’ test leads to heinous results given that the “ancestors” in question were often violently racist and misogynistic white men" part is just so everyday for the left. At Slate.com, they probably honestly think that's the reporting of news.

    All the people I encounter here and elsewhere who are progressives can't tell that progressive SwampMedia propaganda ain't actual news.

    po was stymied t'other day when haranguing on DeSantis and that African American history course when we kept pressing for reporting not preaching. po was stumped. isle keeps posting the week's news as if it's really news, nor sermonizing. It's entertaining and I used to think isle knew he was promoting propaganda. But, not n'more.

    I get it that Fox and the NYP slant to the right a tad but actually presenting propaganda as news? I never see that...unless it's in a self-described editorial.


  10. by islander on February 4, 2023 9:01 am

    Thomas’ test leads to heinous results given that the “ancestors” in question were often violently racist and misogynistic white men. As the 5th Circuit tacitly acknowledged, “our ancestors” would “never have accepted” disarming domestic abusers because they did not believe domestic violence was a crime."

    I guess that’s not news if you already knew this, but I think you could still call "new"...Just ‘old news’ LoL !!

    Good thing we don’t always think the way our forefathers did when they were writing the Constitution ! 👍


  11. by oldedude on February 4, 2023 11:47 am
    Lead-
    I agree with that. When you ask for facts, to many that's an easy ask. What are the stats, numbers, what does the intel say, etc. But many times you get that suzi says this or that. It's not bad to agree with someone, but you really need to see what the facts are to get away from what you "feel," to what you "know." Two separate issues. There's a lot of CDS (Conservative derangement syndrome) here. Here as in other places, the attitude is that if they disagree with someone, you're automatically a Trumpster. It's pretty much out of ignorance. I don't think people are stupid, but incredibly unknowing about the subjects. I'll usually check for facts (although they're open sourced) support before I post.

    Isle keeps reminding me of that canadian guy that was an expert but would never cite anything, so it was always an "opinion" stated as "fact." I've been trying to figure out his name...


  12. by oldedude on February 4, 2023 7:28 pm
    It was like Angela Davis (correct spelling) was "not a Communist." Just shoulda checked your sht.


Go To Top

Comment on: "It keeps getting crazier "

* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
SelectSmart.com home page