Guns International

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected two appeals challenging California gun regulations

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • AustinN4

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Nov 27, 2013
    9,853
    96
    Austin
    The U.S. Supreme Court rejected two appeals challenging California gun regulations, steering clear of the debate over firearm restrictions following last week’s mass shooting at a Florida high school.

    The justices left intact California’s 10-day waiting period for gun purchases, turning away arguments that the policy violates the rights of people whose background checks take less time. The court also rejected a National Rifle Association appeal and let California keep using fees paid on firearm transfers to help fund efforts to track down people who acquire guns illegally.
    Texas SOT
     

    busykngt

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 14, 2011
    4,730
    96
    McKinney
    I’m actually okay with this. At least until such time that a more “conservative” 2A outcome could be assured. Since SCOTUS decisions tend to set long term legal precedents for future court decisions, I’d just as soon wait until Justice Ginsburg kicks the bucket and/or Chief Justice John Roberts retires and President Trump can replace them with strict constitutionalist. At least by refusing to hear these cases, they keep the existing legal issue more-or-less localized and keep the door open for a future (national) SCOTUS decision.
     
    Last edited:

    busykngt

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jun 14, 2011
    4,730
    96
    McKinney
    Are you saying, you don’t believe Pres. Trump will have an opportunity to select anymore Supreme Court justices during his Administration(s)? IMO, this is unlikely.
     

    AustinN4

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Nov 27, 2013
    9,853
    96
    Austin
    Are you saying, you don’t believe Pres. Trump will have an opportunity to select anymore Supreme Court justices during his Administration(s)? IMO, this is unlikely.
    I am saying they will do just about anything so as to keep trump from appointing another.
     

    TheMailMan

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Dec 3, 2015
    3,428
    96
    North of Kaufman
    John Roberts isn't going to retire anytime soon, he's only 63. Either Ginsburg needs to return to the pit from whence she came forth, or Kennedy MIGHT retire. Also Breyer MIGHT retire. He's almost 80.

    Personally I'd be in favor of mandatory retirement at 75.
     

    F350-6

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    May 25, 2009
    4,237
    96
    What if she doesn't die or retire until there is a dem in the WH?

    Is that why google is working so hard on AI? To implant something and make it seem she's still alive until such a time that a more favorable (to them) candidate occupies 1600 Pennsylvania?
     

    jrbfishn

    TGT Addict
    Lifetime Member
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Aug 9, 2013
    28,316
    96
    south of killeen
    Its pretty similar in washington with a waiting period. Im not against the waiting periods.

    Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
    When ordinary people get frustrated by waiting periods they will steal a gun, by one on the street or rely on the old standbys. Hammer, baseball bat, screwdriver or knives.
    For that matter, materials for IEDs are readily available at any grocery store or Walmart with no ID or waiting period. And are more destructive and easy to hide.
    Criminals don't follow the law or waiting period anyway, so waiting periods are pretty much worthless in that regard.

    Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
     

    toddnjoyce

    TGT Addict
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Sep 27, 2017
    19,285
    96
    Boerne
    Read the record today. Justice Thomas’ dissent airs some dirty laundry.

    “The Court would take cases because abortion, speech, and the Fourth Amendment are three of its favored rights. The right to keep and bear arms is apparently this Court’s constitutional orphan.”

    “Nearly eight years ago, this Court declared that the Second Amendment is not a “second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.” McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). “

    https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17-342_4hd5.pdf
     
    Top Bottom