The Supreme Court upholds a gun control law intended to protect domestic violence victims

[Spitpatch]

...all of which was addressed earlier in this thread.

No charge for this service. Drive safely.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Hindsight, perhaps I should not have been surprised that Alito sided with Roberts and the liberal Justices on this one; considering that he joined Scalia on the Heller decision which did state that 2A is "not unlimited" (read, is not absolute)

 

[Koda]

Absense of evidence is an informal fallacy and will never win a debate. Its not anyones job to prove something doesnt exist, or attributed in this case.
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence ".

 

[Indy62]

Not sure about Hitler's quote re: gun control.

But I do know one popular misconception is that Hitler "won" power. Won implies a contest, a democratic election. He did in fact attempt to win the presidency in 1932 through a democratic election, but LOST..to Hindenburg.

Hindenburg, at former Chancellor Von Pappen's pleadings, agreed to appoint Hitler as Chancellor to avoid civil unrest brought on by the ever growing Nazi party and Hitlers SA stormtroopers.

By 1934, the Nazi Party had established enough control over Germany that when Hindenburg finally died, Hitler assumed that role too. Enforcing a one party government. Now he became the Fuhrer.

Power comes from the barrel of a gun.

If anything, WW2 and Hitlers rise should teach everyone that to be disarmed means you have no power. Thus tyrants rule at their whim.

 

[shibbershabber]

What ww2 and hitlers rise should teach everyone is what happens when a polulation is driven to its breaking point. There was nothing enviable about the Weimar era.

And while Hitler ultimately took power... NSDAP had a majority of seats in the Reichstag going into the 32 election and in that election gained another 100 seats... Hitler lost to Bindenburg, yes. But their platforms werent that different and Hindenburg was a mational hero, hitler was a close 2nd place 10 million votes ahead pf the 3rd place guy.

Their messaging was received by the people in a huge way because they'd suffered under leftist decadence and degeneracy for so long that they welcomed the polar opposite even if it meant giving up civil liberties.

Desperate people do desperate things.

This is where I fear the US ends up. We get run into the ground so hard that we will welcome someone to pull us out... Its human nature. Hitler wasnt the first and Americans arent above it.

Gun control doesnt mean bubblegum at that point. Really, do you have a breaking point, politically apeaking where YOU would grab your gun and go die for the change your want to see in your country? Not trying to fedpost but theres an awful lot of bluster in the gun community but really we are all in the same slow boil, just different pots

As with all cases in history, no one thinks to act until the point that its too late.

Hitler took power, but how many millions wanted him to? And aside from the authoritarianism and the camps, economicaly Germany thrived and rebounded massively in those years with a higher standard of living than the US even, who was still trying to crawl out of the depression

For the gun laws, look at the UK's firearms acts of 1920 and 1937.... So again, heavy restriction was the norm in Europe. Not something invented in 1938 Germany

 

[Ura-Ki]

For everyone here upset at the Rhaimi ruling, keep this in mind, This case was NOT brought to SCOTUS by anyone on the 2-A side, it was Merick Garland who pushed it for review, and it was up to our side to litigate it above the 5th circuit who HAD shut it down by following constitutional applications as in Bruen/Heller! The outcome of this was known to our side, what wasn't known until now is if it would reverse Bruen/Heller in any way, or cause additional damage. Justice Roberts opinion was carelessly written and left open more then a few doors that can now be used for further infringements and THAT will hurt us, and will absolutely lead to more 2A cases coming before the court! In the grand scheme of things, this is largely a nothing burger, we are still winning, it's just going to take time. In th emean time, we now await the 9th rulings on the cases before it, claiming they were waiting for Rhaimi, and now that we have it, we can expect the court to issue rulings, which will be absolutely WRONG and then need to be pushed back up to SCOTUS, sams as before this latest ruling! We also have the cases out of Illinois, likely ALL will be GVR'ed back down, and once again, justice is denied until ether a court grows a pair, or SCOTUS starts taking more 2A cases, which is not likely under Roberts!

 

[Ura-Ki]

MY biggest worry here for our 2A rights, is what Roberts wrote, that NO RIGHTS ARE ABSOLUTE! This is flat WRONG, hence the whole reason/purpose behind the B.o.R. in the first place! THIS is the Big Green Door that can now be used against us, and CAN be used to work around Heller/Bruen!

 

[CamoDeafie]

MY biggest worry here for our 2A rights, is what Roberts wrote, that NO RIGHTS ARE ABSOLUTE! This is flat WRONG, hence the whole reason/purpose behind the B.o.R. in the first place! THIS is the Big Green Door that can now be used against us, and CAN be used to work around Heller/Bruen!

Miller then Heller reaffirmed that "no Rights are absolute" and that 2A is not unlimited

 

[arakboss]

The robes are getting goofy.

 

[CamoDeafie]

The robes are getting goofy.

We've not had a direct challenge to NFA, GCA, or FOPA's Hughes Amendment since Miller. All the 2A cases since then have depended on these Fed level laws being "constitutional", and thus 2A being "not an absolute Right/unlimited Right".

 

[arakboss]

We've not had a direct challenge to NFA, GCA, or FOPA's Hughes Amendment since Miller. All the 2A cases since then have depended on these Fed level laws being "constitutional", and thus 2A being "not an absolute Right/unlimited Right".

Cases in a more broad sense.

 

[wired]

Not proven as not coming from him (even by the fact-checking firm's historians consulted, and as they concluded). See above.

I would place such doubt accurately in a statement such as, "Though attributed to him for decades, a recorded or written account of him saying it has yet to be discovered."

Thats really not how quoting works. Hitler said a lot of stuff. He didn't say that . Its up there with Abe Lincoln pontificating on the internet. The Nazi gun laws of 1938 of course were a relaxation of the Weimar era gun laws for vast majority of Germans. Not Jews of course. In any case the Hitler "quote" didn't exist until the mid 1970's.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Thats really not how quoting works. Hitler said a lot of stuff. He didn't say that . Its up there with Abe Lincoln pontificating on the internet. The Nazi gun laws of 1938 of course were a relaxation of the Weimar era gun laws for vast majority of Germans. Not Jews of course. In any case the Hitler "quote" didn't exist until the mid 1970's.

So much for facts over feelings!

 

[wired]

So much for facts over feelings!

Hitler is always the bad guy..

Oh wait...

i got into a big argument with a guy once about who was the better speaker? Hilter or MLK. I went with Hitler. Its easy to get people to go along with your position when you are in the right. It takes a special kind of Ahole to get people to go along with you when your position is the 10th degree of F'd up. The guy who I was "arguing" with didn't speak German ( I do ) and had never heard a Hitler speech. There was a reason he convinced a nation to drink his bathwater. His oratory was magnificent.

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

Hitler is always the bad guy..

Oh wait...

i got into a big argument with a guy once about who was the better speaker? Hilter or MLK. I went with Hitler. Its easy to get people to go along with your position when you are in the right. It takes a special kind of Ahole to get people to go along with you when your position is the 10th degree of F'd up. The guy who I was "arguing" with didn't speak German ( I do ) and had never heard a Hitler speech. There was a reason he convinced a nation to drink his bathwater. His oratory was magnificent.

I mean, yeah, but I my observation was more about the facts supporting that being an actual quote Vs the feeling that it is one

 

[Spitpatch]

Thats really not how quoting works. Hitler said a lot of stuff. He didn't say that . Its up there with Abe Lincoln pontificating on the internet. The Nazi gun laws of 1938 of course were a relaxation of the Weimar era gun laws for vast majority of Germans. Not Jews of course. In any case the Hitler "quote" didn't exist until the mid 1970's.

Ok! So now we have someone who can provide the source of the "quote" in the '70's in order that it be proven not to have come from Hitler.

This is far more than a healthy handful of historians contacted by Politifact could produce.

And I welcome that proof. Now we're making some real progress.

 

[wired]

Ok! So now we have someone who can provide the source of the "quote" in the '70's in order that it be proven not to have come from Hitler.

This is far more than a healthy handful of historians contacted by Politifact could produce.

And I welcome that proof.

Still not how quoting works. Show a publication from 1938 with the quote in German. It doesn't exist .

 

[Spitpatch]

Still not how quoting works. Show a publication from 1938 with the quote in German. It doesn't exist .

I regret that you arrived late to the discussion.

 

[Ura-Ki]

Hitler is always the bad guy..

Oh wait...

i got into a big argument with a guy once about who was the better speaker? Hilter or MLK. I went with Hitler. Its easy to get people to go along with your position when you are in the right. It takes a special kind of Ahole to get people to go along with you when your position is the 10th degree of F'd up. The guy who I was "arguing" with didn't speak German ( I do ) and had never heard a Hitler speech. There was a reason he convinced a nation to drink his bathwater. His oratory was magnificent.

A few weeks ago, I ran into a video that translated Hitler's bigger speeches into english and used A.I. to recreate his actual voice, and your absolutely right, he was an amazing speaker, much like Obummer, it gives you a really good idea just how the Nazi's were able to seize such control over what would have been a very intelligent group of people!

They are also working on translations of Stalin into english using his actual voice, should be a very eye opening experience!

 

[wired]

I regret that you arrived late to the discussion.

Just one . The DAZ was pretty much the paper of record during the Nazi regime . If Hitler made a speech it was in the DAZ . There was no 1938 gun control speech by Hitler.