Gorsuch Confirmed. Will the Kourt Advance Recognition of Gun Rights?

[77zach]

My prediction: A resounding No. Hope I'm wrong. Open Carry, Semi-Auto Weapons and Mag bans, Interstate Handgun Sale Bans, all are ripe for relief. One thing is hopefully certain: No new "gun control" from the Kourt.

If it were a legitimate Kourt, unlicensed Open Carry should be law of the land. The Kourt would just be consolidating previous dicta on the issue when giving a ruling. If that happened, Kalifornia and Nazi York, etc would then move to shall issue concealed carry to encourage citizens to hide their scary guns to stop triggering leftists and statists.

 

[WalkingWolf]

It depends more on the people, and gun (cough, cough) rights group. Scalia made remarks to his approval of OC, yet the NRA, and others did not pick up on it. Two if's might come to play, if Justice Gorsuch follows Scalia's views, opinions, and rulings, and if Norman makes it to the Supreme court. But the problem with Norman the argument will not be for unlicensed OC, just OC as a basic right. It will take another case, that the gun rights groups are unwilling to take to court to bring about secured unfettered OC.

 

[KBCraig]

Gorsuch is an originalist and textualist much like Scalia, but he seems to be more consistent with those principles. And by that I mean that he is utterly unmoved by any personal biases.

That's what frustrated the Dems trying to demand a "straight answer" out of him. They wanted his personal opinion, and he sided with the law, every time.

And as he said, "If you don't like the law, change it!"

He defers to the legislature and to stare decisis, although he celebrated two great examples where the Court overturned its own precedents. The best thing: he doesn't defer to the executive, unlike Garland.

 

[OC4me]

I presume that Kennedy will continue being the swing vote even if Gorsuch proves to be a carbon-copy of Scalia. That being the case, the Second Amendment remains vulnerable to Kennedy's personal opinion, which may be more to the left than we hope.

The future of the Second Amendment is still uncertain.

 

[countryclubjoe]

How many second amendment cases has he presided over? He seems to be more pro government than pro individual liberties.. Time will tell.

CCJ

 

[JamesCanby]

See, among other cites, http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...aled-carry-california-20170410-htmlstory.html

FUQ:

Gorsuch offered some clues where he stands on gun rights during his Senate confirmation hearings, The Trace reported, where he said that the “Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly” and that he would respect the precedent set by the D.C. vs. Heller ruling to allow citizens to possess handguns in their home.​

 

[countryclubjoe]

See, among other cites, http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...aled-carry-california-20170410-htmlstory.html

FUQ:

Gorsuch offered some clues where he stands on gun rights during his Senate confirmation hearings, The Trace reported, where he said that the “Second Amendment protects an individual's right to own firearms and may not be infringed lightly” and that he would respect the precedent set by the D.C. vs. Heller ruling to allow citizens to possess handguns in their home.​

So nice of him to ALLOW citizens to own property and place said property in their humble abode.. The question is, does he support McDonald v City of Chicago..

Again I shall go on record and state " that he is more pro government, than pro individual liberties".. {emphasis added}.. As I said, time will tell.

Regards
CCJ

 

[JamesCanby]

So nice of him to ALLOW citizens to own property and place said property in their humble abode.. The question is, does he support McDonald v City of Chicago..

Again I shall go on record and state " that he is more pro government, than pro individual liberties".. {emphasis added}.. As I said, time will tell.

Regards
CCJ

Can we have some cites that back up your opinion?

 

[Bikenut]

Gorsuch is a beginning. Another two who are more conservative than liberal (note I didn't say "actually conservative" because even the Repubs won't go along with that!) and the sound of liberal heads exploding will be deafening. Then there might be a chance of making actual progress for regaining the ability to exercise the right to bear arms.

 

[countryclubjoe]

Can we have some cites that back up your opinion?

I was not aware that a "cite" was required for an "opinion"..

Regards

 

[countryclubjoe]

You could always write an affidavit, stating that this was your real, honest, true and official opinion. Then you could have it notarized and post a copy of that affidavit.

+ 1000000000000000,
LMAO

 

[WalkingWolf]

You could always write an affidavit, stating that this was your real, honest, true and official opinion. Then you could have it notarized and post a copy of that affidavit.

Without facts to back it up, it is worth what most opinions are worth, nothing.

 

[JamesCanby]

I was not aware that a "cite" was required for an "opinion"..

Regards

Not required, just looking for something that informed your opinion.

 

[countryclubjoe]

Without facts to back it up, it is worth what most opinions are worth, nothing.

Well old wise one, thank you for your "opinion".. Any facts to back said opinion up?.. Oh ok..

 

[WalkingWolf]

Have you got a cite for that.

Nope, so it only has value to those who assign value to it. I can live with that, others not so much.

 

[solus]

Can we have some cites that back up your opinion?

last time i pushed for a cite i was refer'd to the forum's rule: (5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

now the 'liar, liar, pants on fire" tirade is getting olde and as WW observed...they are opinion, take it as such and live with it!

find your own viable fact base to disprove, if you can, otherwise...live with it!

ipse

 

[JamesCanby]

last time i pushed for a cite i was refer'd to the forum's rule: (5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

now the 'liar, liar, pants on fire" tirade is getting olde and as WW observed...they are opinion, take it as such and live with it!

find your own viable fact base to disprove, if you can, otherwise...live with it!

ipse

As I mentioned in reply to the poster's comment, my request for a cite was only to gain insight as to how he formed his opinion, not whether or not his opinion made sense to me. Opinions may be like ... well, you know ... but I was curious how he developed the opinion he stated. I do not believe it has anything to do with Rule 5, but thanks for playing.

 

[solus]

thanks for the condescending commentary...goes well with your age maturity.

ipse

 

[JamesCanby]

thanks for the condescending commentary...goes well with your age maturity.

ipse

Condescending? I am beginning to understand why there are so many on this site that hold disparaging opinions of you and your postings...

 

[solus]

james quote ...but thanks for playing. unquote

con·de·scend·ing
adjective
having or showing a feeling of patronizing superiority.

so james, please tell me where i misspoke?

ipse