Berkeley CSUA MOTD:Entry 46107
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

2007/3/27-29 [Reference/Law/Court, Reference/Military] UID:46107 Activity:kinda low
3/26    "I support the First Amendment right to carry and bear arms," - Rudy
        Giuliani, on Sean Hannity's radio show.
        \_ Are there any other ultra-dense cities in the world
           where it is legal to carry guns?
        \_ Maybe he's trying to make the point that the pen is mightier than
           the sword!
           \_ only if said pen is stuck into the neck
              \- how would you like a pencil in your neck?
                 get off bob dole's lawn.
                 --bdole
                 \_ ???
        \_ Thus far, the D.C. Cir. has little company in its holding that
           the 2d enumerates two rights, one for the states re militias,
           and one for the people. But no court has held that this this
           personal right is incorporated against the states.
           Maybe "Rudy" thinks the personal right would get more mileage
           in the courts if one were to claim that it was based on
           associational freedoms, "free exercise" rights (particularly
           if one was a sikh) or "expressive" political speech rights,
           all of which receive strict scrutiny and are incorporated
           against the states via the 14th.
           Or he just misspoke 1st for 2d.
           \_ "Rudy" misspoke?  Anyway....  If the USSC rules that the 2nd
              does mean 'personal right' to carry a weapon, will you accept
              that or come back and complain that BUSH's court has destroyed
              the USC?
              \_ If my comments conveyed the message that I believe the D.C.
                 Cir. incorrectly decided that the 2d enumerates a personal
                 right and a state right, I apologize. I think that the D.C.
                 Cir. correctly decided that the 2d enumerates a personal
                 right.
                 I would completely support a USSC decision finding that
                 (1) the 2d enumerates a personal right; and
                 (2) this right was incorporated against the states via
                     the 14th.
                 Finding  a personal right w/o incorporation is, in my view,
                 insufficient b/c the states would remain free to regulate
                 arms. Since the 7th's jury trial in civil cases hasn't been
                 incorporated, conceivably the 2d's personal right may not be
                 either.
                 \_ Thanks for clarifying.
2025/05/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
5/24    

You may also be interested in these entries...
2013/6/3-7/23 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:54685 Activity:nil
6/3     Why are "real estate" and "real property" called so?  Does the part
        "real" mean something like "not fake"?
        \- without going into a long discourse into common law,
           it is to distinguish land/fixed property from intangible
           property [like a patent] and movable, personal property,
           like your car. Real property has historically had special
	...
2012/10/1-11/7 [Reference/Law/Court] UID:54488 Activity:nil
10/1    Photos of the Supreme Court in session:
        http://preview.tinyurl.com/8zuqc25 [slate]
	...
2012/3/27-6/1 [Politics/Domestic/911, Reference/Law/Court] UID:54349 Activity:nil
3/27    Trayvon Martin case:
        http://www.csua.org/u/vw7 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk
        Is this truth, or false rumor spread by critics?
        \_ Does it make any difference?
           \_ I guess since there probably won't be solid evidence on either
              side of the story (no witness, no surveillence tape, ...), this
	...