Another US mass shooting

Remove this Banner Ad

Saint

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 1, 2006
5,905
9,183
Victoria
AFL Club
Essendon
Said before a gun violence attack on nra HQ would make a difference.
Add in one attacking the Supreme Court, might get their successors thinking …
No it won't, not at all. The NRA would just demand increased security and money would pour in for it.

These people don't care about sanctity of life. They're doing it for the $$$.

They just need to amend the 2nd amendment so that it can't possibly be as badly misconstrued as it's being now, where they completely ignore the first half of the amendment. Just get rid of the second half altogether.

States have the absolute right to restrict gun ownership to personal protection or hunting purposes and to maintain a regulated militia who cannot personally carry or store their weapons.
 

Crankyhawk

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 21, 2007
23,098
18,148
Melbourne
AFL Club
Hawthorn
No it won't, not at all. The NRA would just demand increased security and money would pour in for it.

These people don't care about sanctity of life. They're doing it for the $$$.

They just need to amend the 2nd amendment so that it can't possibly be as badly misconstrued as it's being now, where they completely ignore the first half of the amendment. Just get rid of the second half altogether.

States have the absolute right to restrict gun ownership to personal protection or hunting purposes and to maintain a regulated militia who cannot personally carry or store their weapons.
the chance of a constitutional change getting through are less than the chance of someone killing the supreme court IMO
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Father Jack

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 23, 2006
21,015
17,423
between hope and reality
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspur FC
If this carries on questions should be asked about whether these guys still have a social contract to enforce law in America.
I was thinking the same thing this morning, these guys weren't selected on any judicial or legal qualification, they were selected purely for ideology. They ignore the constitution when it comes to church and state, and they ignore the bit about a well-regulated militia. If they start just making s**t up, who's to stop them? Congress? Yeah right.

What is stopping them from overturning the next presidential election if it doesn't go their way, there just has to be a case brought before them, any case will do and it appears that they can rule any way they like
 

Saint

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 1, 2006
5,905
9,183
Victoria
AFL Club
Essendon
I was thinking the same thing this morning, these guys weren't selected on any judicial or legal qualification, they were selected purely for ideology. They ignore the constitution when it comes to church and state, and they ignore the bit about a well-regulated militia. If they start just making s**t up, who's to stop them? Congress? Yeah right.

What is stopping them from overturning the next presidential election if it doesn't go their way, there just has to be a case brought before them, any case will do and it appears that they can rule any way they like
There are serious flaws in the constitution, but they treat it like it's perfect. The GOP have shown they're happy to use those loop-holes (such as life-time appointments for ideologues instead of constitutional scholars.), but the Dems are always trying to play "fair" and only end up in an unfair fight with one hand tied behind their back.

Clarence Thomas's wife was at the Jan 6th rallies FFS.
 

Festerz

Premiership Player
May 20, 2019
4,686
14,469
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PAFC Maggies SANFL
The court doesn't enforce the law.
I don't think you understand how 'enforcing the law' actually works.

The US Supreme Court, much like the High Court in Australia, plays a key role in 'enforcing the law' through its interpretation of legislation and its consistency with the Constitution.

The major difference between the US and Parliamentary systems is in how the fundamental principles of the 'separation of powers' work (or do not work) in both systems.

Specifically the close alignment between the political executive and the judiciary under the US system (especially in the appointment of judicial representatives by the government of the day) results in party politics playing a fundamental role in how legislation is enforced.

The dangers this presents to a democracy when you have an narcissistic, paranoid egomaniac like Donald Trump, who blatantly ignores the democratic principles and laws of his own country to seek and retain political power for him, his family and political supporters, has become abundantly clear in recent months.



 
Last edited:

Saint

Norm Smith Medallist
Feb 1, 2006
5,905
9,183
Victoria
AFL Club
Essendon
So, basically anywhere in the US now, you can carry a concealed gun and it's not a crime thanks to the GOP/NRA/SUpreme Court.

And the GOP thinks it's the Dems who let the lawless people run the place.

I think a constitutional amendment to overturn this which went hell-for-leather on drug dealers being allowed to carry guns would win. It's an easy PR piece. Ad after ad of drug dealers shooting kids, bombard the airwaves with it. Throw in some school shootings for good measure.

What are the NRA ads going to be? Good guys shooting bad guys? People being scared without their gun? Hardly going to win voters over who don't really want anyone being shot. It'll be wall to wall ads of people being scared or people being shot. That fear would drive people to vote for less guns.
 

Festerz

Premiership Player
May 20, 2019
4,686
14,469
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PAFC Maggies SANFL
I can see what you mean, but the job of their SC is interpretation and ruling on applications etc. Enforcement is for the police and other agencies.
Yes. My definition of enforcement was on a broader level.

Specifically the police and other agencies can only enforce (or apply) the laws that they have at their disposal - specifically as developed by the executive and enacted and interpreted by the courts.

The 3 things are not mutually exclusive.

Courts can for example, have the legislated power to order the immediate enforcement of a law or the arrest of an individual by an enforcement agency including police. And in Australia of we have sheriffs who have the responsibility of enforcing the orders of the court relating to the recovery of money; the seizure of property; the sale of a debtor's property; and the arrest of people acting in defiance of court orders.

In relation to this issue, a strike of a pen from the US Supreme Court has seen what NY Police can enforce as law one day, they cannot enforce as law the next (specifically in this case the ability of citizens of NY state to carry guns)
 
Last edited:

Festerz

Premiership Player
May 20, 2019
4,686
14,469
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
PAFC Maggies SANFL
And now for some good news:



Screen Shot 2022-06-24 at 3.56.55 pm.png



Washington: The Senate easily approved a bipartisan gun violence bill Thursday that seemed unthinkable a month ago, setting up final approval of what will be Congress’ most far-reaching response in decades to the nation’s run of brutal mass shootings.

After years of procedural delays that derailed Democratic efforts to curb firearms, Democrats and 15 Republicans decided that congressional inaction was untenable after last month’s rampages in New York and Texas. It took weeks of closed-door talks but bargainers from both parties emerged with a compromise embodying incremental but impactful movement to curb bloodshed that has come to regularly shock — yet no longer surprise — the nation.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Financialpanther

Brownlow Medallist
Apr 20, 2006
10,807
11,767
Where the AFL fears to tread meaningfully
AFL Club
North Melbourne
And now for some good news:



View attachment 1431312



Washington: The Senate easily approved a bipartisan gun violence bill Thursday that seemed unthinkable a month ago, setting up final approval of what will be Congress’ most far-reaching response in decades to the nation’s run of brutal mass shootings.

After years of procedural delays that derailed Democratic efforts to curb firearms, Democrats and 15 Republicans decided that congressional inaction was untenable after last month’s rampages in New York and Texas. It took weeks of closed-door talks but bargainers from both parties emerged with a compromise embodying incremental but impactful movement to curb bloodshed that has come to regularly shock — yet no longer surprise — the nation.
Someone won't be happy

FV8uYxIUcAAAN5_
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad