Jump to content

Texas and Hawaii


Recommended Posts

Today, the Hawaii Supreme Court defied SCOTUS’ second amendment precedent in Heller and Bruen. 

https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/SCAP-22-0000561.pdf

For those lefties who celebrate the decision, guess you’ll let Texas off the hook?!?! In particular, those who accused Texas of flaunting SCOTUS and federal law.
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





2 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Today, the Hawaii Supreme Court defied SCOTUS’ second amendment precedent in Heller and Bruen. 

https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/SCAP-22-0000561.pdf

For those lefties who celebrate the decision, guess you’ll let Texas off the hook?!?! In particular, those who accused Texas of flaunting SCOTUS and federal law.
 

 

Is it too much for good people to be disgusted by everyone wanting to carry in public places?  When did that become anti American?  Go ahead.... claim that isn't what this is about, but it is exactly what the conversation should be about.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Today, the Hawaii Supreme Court defied SCOTUS’ second amendment precedent in Heller and Bruen. 

https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/SCAP-22-0000561.pdf

For those lefties who celebrate the decision, guess you’ll let Texas off the hook?!?! In particular, those who accused Texas of flaunting SCOTUS and federal law.
 

 

If the exam question was to distinguish those two situations, how would you answer?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Oh, look. Deflection.
 

How surprising.

Oh, look. Rebuffs critical thinking. How surprising. Sorry, thought you went to law school and wouldn’t be stumped so easily.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since article I, section 17 imitates the Second Amendment,

it is helpful to look at what the Second Amendment’s words mean.
A textual approach to constitutional interpretation
appreciates that words appear (or do not) for a reason.

Both clauses of article I, section 17 and the Second
Amendment use military-tinged language – “well regulated
militia” and “bear arms” - to limit the use of deadly weapons to
a military purpose.

In contrast, there are no words that mention a personal
right to possess lethal weapons in public places for possible
self-defense
.

First, we examine the prefatory clause to article I,
section 17 and the Second Amendment.

The opening words carry a military meaning. The “well regulated militia” clause warms up the rest, defining the text. It “sets forth the object of the
Amendment and informs the meaning of the remainder of its text.”
Heller, 554 U.S. at 643 (Stevens, J., dissenting).

Article I, section 17’s first clause offers context and
clarity, like preambles do. “It cannot be presumed that any
clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect.”
See Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 174 (1803).

The federal constitution deploys “militia” to mean an
irregular state military force that may be called up by the
federal government to combat outside invasions or internal
insurrections. See Silveira v. Lockyer, 312 F.3d 1052, 1070
(9th Cir. 2002); Paul Finkelman, “A Well Regulated Militia”: The
Second Amendment in Historical Perspective, 76 Chi.-Kent L. Rev.
195, 209 (2000).

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 2/8/2024 at 9:50 PM, TexasTiger said:

Oh, look. Rebuffs critical thinking. How surprising. Sorry, thought you went to law school and wouldn’t be stumped so easily.

please do not get nola talking fancy as i hardly understand a word he says when he gets rolling. yes i am a big dummy and it is sad but true........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2024 at 10:45 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

Oh, look. Deflection.
 

How surprising.

That's ironic, coming from the the King of deflection.   :rolleyes:

Typically, the best response you can muster has always been a "laughing" icon.

You're either pathologically arrogant or simply unwilling to engage for reasons we can only surmise. 

  • Haha 1
  • Facepalm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hawaii and Alaska are uniquely geographically isolated states. In many ways they have the ability to enact state specific legislation that doesn’t easily impact other states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, homersapien said:

That's ironic, coming from the the King of deflection.   :rolleyes:

Typically, the best response you can muster has always been a "laughing" icon.

You're either pathologically arrogant or simply unwilling to engage for reasons we can only surmise. 

Seriously? No one will take your crown as king of deflection. You have nothing to worry about in that regard.

Engaging you has become an exercise of recitation as you cannot recall your previous post much less that of other posters, even in the same thread, yet demand others do it for you. Frankly homes, it is a waste of time and energy to even attempt such a task. You can surmise whatever it is you wish, but you cannot change the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2024 at 6:45 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

Today, the Hawaii Supreme Court defied SCOTUS’ second amendment precedent in Heller and Bruen. 

https://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/SCAP-22-0000561.pdf

For those lefties who celebrate the decision, guess you’ll let Texas off the hook?!?! In particular, those who accused Texas of flaunting SCOTUS and federal law.
 

 

I didn’t realize that anyone who is against wearing a firearm in public (or large capacity semi’s for that matter) is a “leftie”. Personally I think it’s more metro vs rural than left/right and more applicable at the state and local level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Seriously? No one will take your crown as king of deflection. You have nothing to worry about in that regard.

Engaging you has become an exercise of recitation as you cannot recall your previous post much less that of other posters, even in the same thread, yet demand others do it for you. Frankly homes, it is a waste of time and energy to even attempt such a task. You can surmise whatever it is you wish, but you cannot change the truth.

i rename you iggy........you ignore the truth to be a seeker of it so many times. are you young or old may i ask?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

.you ignore the truth to be a seeker of it so many times.

Feel free to provide evidence of this claim. I'll wait. :popcorn:

 

3 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

are you young or old may i ask?

Middle-aged.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Feel free to provide evidence of this claim. I'll wait. :popcorn:

 

Middle-aged.

you know i am playing iggy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2024 at 8:41 PM, AU9377 said:

Is it too much for good people to be disgusted by everyone wanting to carry in public places? 

Be disgusted all you want. Just do not infringe on my right to protect myself as I see fit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, aubiefifty said:

you know i am playing iggy?

If I'm honest, I was suspecting high, but we'll go with playing. :cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, AUFAN78 said:

If I'm honest, I was suspecting high, but we'll go with playing. :cool:

not yest but i will be. pot lessens the crazy believe it or not..........

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Seriously? No one will take your crown as king of deflection. You have nothing to worry about in that regard.

Engaging you has become an exercise of recitation as you cannot recall your previous post much less that of other posters, even in the same thread, yet demand others do it for you. Frankly homes, it is a waste of time and energy to even attempt such a task. You can surmise whatever it is you wish, but you cannot change the truth.


To me this signals that you have a secret crush on Homer and just don't know how to properly express these complex emotions. 

 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

word around the water cooler is you drink decaf.......color me shocked and disappointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/21/2024 at 2:47 PM, NolaAuTiger said:

Still waiting . . .

https://www.envoy.cirrus.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-02-15/hawaii-justices-rebuke-us-supreme-court-s-gun-decisions
 

“Blue states are not generally known for attacking the federal government or running rogue programs in defiance of federal law. After all, that’s the business  of Texas. “

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many states and cities pass laws/regulations that limit public carry or the presence of firearms in public places. In fact even Republicans have been known to block weapons at their rallies and courthouses. This is not a de facto defiance of the U.S. Constitution or the SCOTUS interpretations of the constitution.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

Seriously? No one will take your crown as king of deflection. You have nothing to worry about in that regard.

Engaging you has become an exercise of recitation as you cannot recall your previous post much less that of other posters, even in the same thread, yet demand others do it for you. Frankly homes, it is a waste of time and energy to even attempt such a task. You can surmise whatever it is you wish, but you cannot change the truth.

I explained this already.  I can't help your poor memory. Pay attention!

And I sure as hell aren't going to clarify, much less repeat it.  ;D

Edited by homersapien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...