Page 1 of 3

Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:14 pm
by ip_law-hokie
Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:25 pm
by cwtcr hokie
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:29 pm
by ip_law-hokie
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:32 pm
by awesome guy
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Where did you get your law degree?

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:49 pm
by WestEndHokie39
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
On one hand, it's a terrible ruling.

On the other hand, the results of the "ban" will demonstrate how utterly useless, at best, and utterly deadly to innocent citizens, at worst, any "ban" is...

Sadly, people like ip will not learn a thing from it...

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:50 pm
by ip_law-hokie
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Where did you get your law degree?
Maybe from the same place the 4th circuit did.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:51 pm
by awesome guy
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Where did you get your law degree?
Maybe from the same place the 4th circuit did.
Cracker Jack box?

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:52 pm
by ip_law-hokie
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Where did you get your law degree?
Maybe from the same place the 4th circuit did.
Cracker Jack box?
so the 4th circuit is a bunch of morans?

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:55 pm
by awesome guy
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote: Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Where did you get your law degree?
Maybe from the same place the 4th circuit did.
Cracker Jack box?
so the 4th circuit is a bunch of morans?
They are on this case, your style of tyranny.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 8:06 pm
by ip_law-hokie
http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/[/quote]

Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god[/quote]

I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]Where did you get your law degree?[/quote]

Maybe from the same place the 4th circuit did.[/quote]Cracker Jack box?[/quote]

so the 4th circuit is a bunch of morans?[/quote]They are on this case, your style of tyranny.[/quote]

got it.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 8:39 pm
by BigDave
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 8:48 pm
by 133743Hokie
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
....and secede from the union.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 8:52 pm
by WestEndHokie39
133743Hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
....and secede from the union.
...and establish their own bathroom rules and opt out of socialized health care plan.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 8:53 pm
by WestEndHokie39
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Allowing the 4th circuit's ruling that semi-automatic rifles are not constitutionally protected. Good stuff here.

http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/27/sup ... -ban-case/
Its a good thing criminals worry sooooo much about supreme court rulings, whew, thank god
I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Except for single payer health care, right? That would like to ram down everyone's throats...

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 8:55 pm
by ip_law-hokie
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:02 pm
by BigDave
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In other words, you want localities to do things you like, whether they are forced to do so by the national government or choose to do so themselves.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:02 pm
by cwtcr hokie
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you are getting killed with your hypocrisy, you may just want to move on. As others have rightly pointed out, the rules are for all the nation but lets adjust for certain spots....not a plan that will end in good consequences.

Never mind that criminals already break lots of laws, making another one will not stop a single criminal act

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:03 pm
by cwtcr hokie
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In other words, you want localities to do things you like, whether they are forced to do so by the national government or choose to do so themselves.
unless it involves baking a cake for someone, then the gov. has to use force

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:15 pm
by ip_law-hokie
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In other words, you want localities to do things you like, whether they are forced to do so by the national government or choose to do so themselves.
Not at all. The predisposition should be to allow localities to do as they want. Of course there are limits. The inability to own semi-automatic weapons should not be one of those limits. I'm glad its not.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:18 pm
by awesome guy
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In other words, you want localities to do things you like, whether they are forced to do so by the national government or choose to do so themselves.
Not at all. The predisposition should be to allow localities to do as they want. Of course there are limits. The inability to own semi-automatic weapons should not be one of those limits. I'm glad its not.
Because?

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:19 pm
by ip_law-hokie
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

you are getting killed with your hypocrisy, you may just want to move on. As others have rightly pointed out, the rules are for all the nation but lets adjust for certain spots....not a plan that will end in good consequences.

Never mind that criminals already break lots of laws, making another one will not stop a single criminal act
you don't seem to understand federalism, or the notion that some things are permitted (or not permitted) in some places, and not permitted (or permitted) in others. for example, Massachusetts has a form of "free" single payer health care. that's a good thing.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:21 pm
by BigDave
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Not at all. The predisposition should be to allow localities to do as they want. Of course there are limits. The inability to own semi-automatic weapons should not be one of those limits. I'm glad its not.
Because?
Because IP doesn't like it.

IP, what exactly do you think a semi-automatic weapon is?

Semi-automatic only means that you don't have to re-cock it before shooting again. We're not talking about machine guns.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:21 pm
by ip_law-hokie
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:I’m happy the localities are allowed to govern themselves as they best see fit.
... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In other words, you want localities to do things you like, whether they are forced to do so by the national government or choose to do so themselves.
Not at all. The predisposition should be to allow localities to do as they want. Of course there are limits. The inability to own semi-automatic weapons should not be one of those limits. I'm glad its not.
Because?
Because I value the ability of a locality to ban semi-automatic weapons over the right of citizen who chooses to live in that locality to own a semi-automatic weapon.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:23 pm
by ip_law-hokie
BigDave wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:Not at all. The predisposition should be to allow localities to do as they want. Of course there are limits. The inability to own semi-automatic weapons should not be one of those limits. I'm glad its not.
Because?
Because IP doesn't like it.

IP, what exactly do you think a semi-automatic weapon is?

Semi-automatic only means that you don't have to re-cock it before shooting again. We're not talking about machine guns.
OK. Still OK with it.

Re: Props to the 4th Circuit and SC

Posted: Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:38 pm
by awesome guy
ip_law-hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
BigDave wrote: ... which is why we allow localities to torture suspects into confession, suppress free speech, and establish Presbyterianism as the official state religion.
In this instance. I’m glad that localities are allowed to govern themselves as they see fit in this instance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In other words, you want localities to do things you like, whether they are forced to do so by the national government or choose to do so themselves.
Not at all. The predisposition should be to allow localities to do as they want. Of course there are limits. The inability to own semi-automatic weapons should not be one of those limits. I'm glad its not.
Because?
Because I value the ability of a locality to ban semi-automatic weapons over the right of citizen who chooses to live in that locality to own a semi-automatic weapon.
Regardless of what the constitution says. Got it