Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Bay area Radio station debates gun rights.

  1. #1
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691

    Bay area Radio station debates gun rights.

    http://www.kqed.org/epArchive/R201007190900

    After listening to this, I find it interesting that the LCAV was mostly concerned about the states losing the ability to violate the 2nd amendment.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    According to that program unless you are a "chosen" plantiff you shouldn't challenge a law in court. The audacity of these NRA types is overwelming.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    IMHO, by "chosen", I think they mean that there are certain cases that need to be filed before others. A careful step by step process to establish favorable decisions before proceeding to the next one. If they don't do it that way, there can be decisions made that need to be overturned.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
    IMHO, by "chosen", I think they mean that there are certain cases that need to be filed before others. A careful step by step process to establish favorable decisions before proceeding to the next one. If they don't do it that way, there can be decisions made that need to be overturned.
    So, I should get the approval of the SAF, NRA, GOA, and the TFA before I should file a lawsuit to protect my rights in Tennessee? Maybe I'll only have to wait a couple of hundred years before I'll have a right to carry a gun in Tennessee.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Gundude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Sandy Eggo County
    Posts
    1,691
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    So, I should get the approval of the SAF, NRA, GOA, and the TFA before I should file a lawsuit to protect my rights in Tennessee? Maybe I'll only have to wait a couple of hundred years before I'll have a right to carry a gun in Tennessee.
    I don't know about your case or Tenn. law, but you might check with them first. They may take your case for you. A little expert advice goes a long way.
    A citizen may not be required to offer a ―good and substantial reason-- why he should be permitted to exercise his rights. The right‘s existence is all the reason he needs.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
    I don't know about your case or Tenn. law, but you might check with them first. They may take your case for you. A little expert advice goes a long way.
    The NRA didn't approve of Heller and at the last second cut in on the McDonald case. The NRA can go to Hell as far as I am concerned. These gun groups talk big, but aren't doing anything about it. I'm not so sure they want "constitutional carry". It seems as if they want rules and regulations, in other words infringement.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    “Unfortunately there’s also, I think one of the biggest threats to actually advancing the Second Amendment right is that there are some people out there that think litigating a Second Amendment case should be easy now. So, there is a lot of ill conceived litigation being filed…They think anybody who has a strong opinion about the Second Amendment is qualified to be a plaintiff or be a lawyer for such a plaintiff. The problem is those lawsuits aren’t being chosen necessarily as wisely as they should be, those plaintiffs aren’t being picked as wisely as they should be, it’s really not a good strategic move. The NRA and CRPA are trying to advance strategic litigation with the right plaintiffs picking the right issues.”
    Chuck Michel, civil rights attorney and spokesperson for the California Rifle and Pistol Association minute 4:12

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Luis Obispo, California, USA
    Posts
    289
    The NRA didn't want Heller at first, because it wasn't a slam-dunk, no-doubt total win 2nd-A case. As proven, Heller dealt SPECIFICALLY with DC, and NOT "the people". As such, they were forced to add on to McDonald, which was more close to a full 2nd-A case than Heller, and was helped by being nearly identical.

    Still, neither decision unequivocally demands 2nd-A adherence from ALL government forms. As such, we have Chicago re-writing their gun ban to comply with "reasonable restrictions". Anyone can see that city, county, state, and federal laws are NOT falling into line with the 2nd or the 14th amendments as hoped for or predicted by some.

    Where exactly do you think we would be RIGHT NOW without the NRA? Certainly not with CCW in most states, certainly not with reciprocity, certainly not with open carry, and certainly not with our vast hunting and target shooting resources.

    We, you and I, are the NRA.
    We, you and I, should be fighting for our Constitutional rights every day.

    If you simply expect the NRA, or GOA, or CRPA to poop out your rights to you just because you own a gun, while you do nothing but complain on web forms, then you need to go to the back of the line because you aren't ready yet.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Brentwood, Tennessee
    Posts
    1,956
    Quote Originally Posted by Army View Post
    If you simply expect the NRA, or GOA, or CRPA to poop out your rights to you just because you own a gun, while you do nothing but complain on web forms, then you need to go to the back of the line because you aren't ready yet.
    What has the NRA done in Tennessee? They've done nothing, I've done more than they have. I'm not an attorney and have a TN constitutional challenge pending. According to the CRPA they haven't picked me so I shouldn't even have filed.

  10. #10
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by Gundude View Post
    IMHO, by "chosen", I think they mean that there are certain cases that need to be filed before others. A careful step by step process to establish favorable decisions before proceeding to the next one. If they don't do it that way, there can be decisions made that need to be overturned.
    Yes, Gundude, you are correct.
    Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

  11. #11
    Regular Member RussP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Central Virginia
    Posts
    393
    Quote Originally Posted by kwikrnu View Post
    What has the NRA done in Tennessee? They've done nothing, I've done more than they have. I'm not an attorney and have a TN constitutional challenge pending. According to the CRPA they haven't picked me so I shouldn't even have filed.
    Yep...
    Freedom has a taste to those who fight and almost die, that the protected will never know.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •