Canada 's Laws - Page 3
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 26 of 26

Thread: Canada 's Laws

  1. Quote Originally Posted by HKS View Post
    And the C/A-7 is clearly out of line with the Heller decision, written by Scalia, agreed to by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito.

    All you need to do is read. And think. It helps if you think. Before you speak/type.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  2.   
  3. #22
    The CA-7 is not God.

    The CA-9 concluded the exact opposite of the CA-7 in Peruta vs San Diego.

    Unless you have crystal balls Sailor Sam you don't know either.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by HKS View Post
    The CA-7 is not God.

    The CA-9 concluded the exact opposite of the CA-7 in Peruta vs San Diego.

    Unless you have crystal balls Sailor Sam you don't know either.
    Once again, as expected, you fail. Peruta vs. San Diego was limited to CONCEALING a firearm. And that is your problem You cannot understand that court decisions are LIMITED to the QUESTION being decided. Heller v. DC was about keeping and bearing firearms in the home and the home only. The question before the court was limited to the home. And because the only question before the court was possession of firearms in the home, their decision was limited to that question. That in no way, shape or form limits the right to bear arms to the home only and not in public simply because that was the only question the Heller decision settled.

    In the same way Peruta vs. San Diego was limited 100% to carrying a CONCEALED firearm in public. It did not address, in general, a right to carry a firearm in public - only the right to CONCEAL that firearm. A two paragraph quote from the Peruta decision shows your complete and utter failure to understand both the Heller and the Peruta decisions:

    "We do not reach the question whether the Second Amendment protects some ability to carry firearms in public, such as open carry. That question was left open by the Supreme Court in Heller, and we have no need to answer it here. Because Plaintiffs challenge only policies governing concealed carry, we reach only the question whether the Second Amendment protects, in any degree, the ability to carry concealed firearms in public. Based on the overwhelming consesus of historical sources, we conclude that the protection of the Second Amendment - whatever scope of that protection may be - simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public.

    The Second Amendment may or may not protect, to some degree, a right of a member of the general public to carry firearms in public. But the existence vel non of such a right, and the sope of such a right, are separate from and independent of the question presented here. We hold only that there is no Second Amendment right for members of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public."

    The very case that you presented concludes that Heller did not address carrying a firearm in public and that their own decision on the question before them only applies to carry a CONCEALED firearm in public.
    Anyone who says, "I support the 2nd amendment, BUT"... doesn't. Element of Surprise: a mythical element that many believe has the same affect upon criminals that Kryptonite has upon Superman.

  5. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by NavyLCDR View Post
    Once again, as expected, you fail. Peruta vs. San Diego was limited to CONCEALING a firearm. And that is your problem You cannot understand that court decisions are LIMITED to the QUESTION being decided. Heller v. DC was about keeping and bearing firearms in the home and the home only. The question before the court was limited to the home. And because the only question before the court was possession of firearms in the home, their decision was limited to that question. That in no way, shape or form limits the right to bear arms to the home only and not in public simply because that was the only question the Heller decision settled.

    In the same way Peruta vs. San Diego was limited 100% to carrying a CONCEALED firearm in public. It did not address, in general, a right to carry a firearm in public - only the right to CONCEAL that firearm. A two paragraph quote from the Peruta decision shows your complete and utter failure to understand both the Heller and the Peruta decisions:

    "We do not reach the question whether the Second Amendment protects some ability to carry firearms in public, such as open carry. That question was left open by the Supreme Court in Heller, and we have no need to answer it here. Because Plaintiffs challenge only policies governing concealed carry, we reach only the question whether the Second Amendment protects, in any degree, the ability to carry concealed firearms in public. Based on the overwhelming consesus of historical sources, we conclude that the protection of the Second Amendment - whatever scope of that protection may be - simply does not extend to the carrying of concealed firearms in public by members of the general public.

    The Second Amendment may or may not protect, to some degree, a right of a member of the general public to carry firearms in public. But the existence vel non of such a right, and the sope of such a right, are separate from and independent of the question presented here. We hold only that there is no Second Amendment right for members of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public."

    The very case that you presented concludes that Heller did not address carrying a firearm in public and that their own decision on the question before them only applies to carry a CONCEALED firearm in public.
    It's really funny when you declare yourself the winner and then follow this declaration with pure crap.

    You talk just like a N.Korean.

    Maybe you should move there, Sailor Sam.

  6. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    4,255
    Quote Originally Posted by HKS View Post
    It's really funny when you declare yourself the winner and then follow this declaration with pure crap.

    You talk just like a N.Korean.

    Maybe you should move there, Sailor Sam.
    LOL. HKS got mad, because he got called out on posting BS.

  7. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    ARIZONA-a short distance from the sun
    Posts
    8,901
    ~ God Hates Religion ~
    But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast