Log in

View Full Version : Here's an interesting one for y'all to discuss...



CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 02:00 PM
http://www.kcbd.com/story/16557780/lubbock-judge-shoots-down-gun-rights-lawsuit

Lubbock judge shoots down gun rights lawsuit

Posted: Jan 19, 2012 3:33 PM CST
Updated: Jan 19, 2012 10:30 PM CST
By James Clark - email




District Judge Sam R. Cummings
LUBBOCK, TX (KCBD) -
For the second time in roughly four months, a Lubbock federal judge has ruled against the NRA in two gun rights lawsuits.

The ruling made on Thursday upholds the State of Texas law that puts certain restrictions on persons between the ages of 18 and 20.

The law does not allow those under the age of 21 to have a concealed handgun license or CHL. The NRA sued the state back in 2009, saying the law is discriminatory and a violation of Second Amendment rights.

At the same time, the NRA sued federal agencies, saying restrictions on the purchase of guns by those under the age of 21 were also discriminatory. The lawsuit against federal agencies was thrown out in late September and that case is currently on appeal.

There is no word yet on whether the NRA will also appeal this latest ruling.

In part, the judge said both sides were arguing over the issue of age, but U.S. District Court Judge Sam Cummings said Thursday in his ruling, "This approach puts the cart before the horse."

"Because the Court is of the opinion that the Second Amendment does not confer a right that extends beyond the home," Cummings said, "it need not reach the question regarding the age of investiture of such a right."

But the judge did not ignore the issue of age. Cummings wrote, "Texas has identified a legitimate state interest - public safety - and passed legislation that is rationally related to addressing that issue."

The two rulings together mean that the state and federal governments can put restrictions on the gun rights of people who have not reached the age of 21.



On Thursday, we went to a local gun shop and to Texas Tech to ask people of all ages what they thought about 18-20 year olds not being able to get their conceal and carry license.

J.D. Clay and Colin Moore both work at Sharpshooter's Gun Shop, but there's one big difference between the two.

Moore is 18, so he can't apply for his concealed handgun license. Clay can.

"I remember back before I turned 21 to get my CHL, I was frustrated because I wanted to buy a handgun," Clay recalled.

They both work closely with firearms and say they have concerns about both arguments.

"It's a little unfair, I believe, especially for people that have been around them a long enough amount of time," Moore said.

"An 18 and a 21-year-old, the maturity levels are completely different," Clay told us.

But there are strict requirements involved with getting a CHL, even if you are over 21.

"To get your CHL, you have to go through a 10 hour course mandated by the state," Clay said.

Moore suggests looking at 18-20 year olds on a case by case basis and giving them a more rigorous test

"I believe they should be given the chance to pass a test or a course to be able to carry," Moore said.

So what about people who aren't around guns every day? We went to Texas Tech to find out.

"If you know how to use it, you should be allowed to have a gun," one student said.

"I think at age 20 people are mature enough to know what's right and wrong and what's appropriate and what's not," said another.

Some students have no interest in applying for such a license.

"I don't have any business having a concealed gun, shooting a gun, carrying a gun," said Corey Vaughn.

Brandon Ostrom is in the military, so by law he could get his CHL when he was 18.

"If you're mature enough to own a handgun, than you should be mature enough to carry it around," Ostrom said.

Ivan Hristov said he sees both sides.

"In a way when you have it, you can protect yourself, defend yourself, but if everyone has it maybe the crime will be increase," he said.

We reached out to the NRA for a comment, but hadn't heard back as of Thursday night.

It's unclear whether they'll appeal this decision.

CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 02:02 PM
My opinion?

If the second amendment rights don't extend pas the home, what OTHER constitutional rights are also limited by this framework? I'm no legal scholar but this ruling seems to make no sense.

Oh, Gee!!
01-20-2012, 02:11 PM
Didn't you leave already?

cantthinkofanything
01-20-2012, 02:13 PM
My opinion?

If the second amendment rights don't extend pas the home, what OTHER constitutional rights are also limited by this framework? I'm no legal scholar but this ruling seems to make no sense.

It's interesting. They are upholding the Texas law but at the same time it seems laying the groundwork to eventually rule against conceal and carry or having a gun anywhere outside of the house.

mouse
01-20-2012, 02:14 PM
QVS3WNt7yRU

ChumpDumper
01-20-2012, 02:14 PM
It would be nice to see the the main precedents the judge used in this case. I've never heard of this reasoning.


This guy doesn't seem to be any kind of liberal FWIW.

Winehole23
01-20-2012, 02:14 PM
The law does not allow those under the age of 21 to have a concealed handgun license or CHL. is bullshit. are 18 year olds adults or what?

I can see not letting em have a gun until they're of age to drink as well, but it sucks for the 18 year old. They have all of the liability but few of the attached privileges and prerogatives. between the ages of 18 and 21 it's like one inhabits a slightly defective state of adulthood.

Why is it this way?

Because insurance companies and law enforcement, continually in the ears of public officials, say its best for us. That's bull. Either extend childhood to age 21, or confer total adulthood at 18. training wheels for adulthood sucks.

mouse
01-20-2012, 02:19 PM
Why is it only the law abiding people have to jump through hoops to defend themselves when Tyrone down the street doesn't?

http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lx1uuyqs9n1qg7qvvo1_500.jpg

clambake
01-20-2012, 02:21 PM
My opinion?

If the second amendment rights don't extend pas the home, what OTHER constitutional rights are also limited by this framework? I'm no legal scholar but this ruling seems to make no sense.

well, in socal, kids can get their drivers license, however, they can't drive with just other kids their age.

welcome back, lets rag on crookskanks.

CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 02:23 PM
Lets talk politics and not rag on anyone...

well...











maybe Boutons...:lol

clambake
01-20-2012, 02:25 PM
make it bou and skanks and you got a deal.

ElNono
01-20-2012, 02:31 PM
is bullshit. are 18 year olds adults or what?

I can see not letting em have a gun until they're of age to drink as well, but it sucks for the 18 year old. They have all of the liability but few of the attached privileges and prerogatives. between the ages of 18 and 21 it's like one inhabits a slightly defective state of adulthood.

Why is it this way?

Because insurance companies and law enforcement, continually in the ears of public officials, say its best for us. That's bull. Either extend childhood to age 21, or confer total adulthood at 18. training wheels for adulthood sucks.

I agree with this. If you get all the adult responsibilities when you turn 18, why are you not going to get the all the privileges as well?

boutons_deux
01-20-2012, 02:32 PM
dickless gun fetishists, fuck'em all, a shit stain on American civilization

clambake
01-20-2012, 02:33 PM
dickless gun fetishists, fuck'em all, a shit stain on American civilization

i have guns. lots of them. you want me not to have them?

cantthinkofanything
01-20-2012, 02:34 PM
i have guns. lots of them. you want me not to have them?

I just want Boutons to not have a computer.

clambake
01-20-2012, 02:37 PM
bou is ok, just a bit uber passionate.

CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 02:38 PM
I agree with this. If you get all the adult responsibilities when you turn 18, why are you not going to get the all the privileges as well?
Agreed.

The 18 year old gang bangers are already carrying guns. Why not let the good kids get their CHL?

CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 02:41 PM
bou is ok, just a bit uber passionate.

In my newer kinder gentler cyber persona I am going to try to treat Boutons like my retarded nephew...either ignore him completely or give him credit for effort.

cantthinkofanything
01-20-2012, 02:52 PM
In my newer kinder gentler cyber persona I am going to try to treat Boutons like my retarded nephew...either ignore him completely or give him credit for effort.

or make him take off his clothes in front of you

ElNono
01-20-2012, 02:57 PM
Agreed.

The 18 year old gang bangers are already carrying guns. Why not let the good kids get their CHL?

I personally wouldn't put it through that reasoning. After all, some 16 years old gangbangers are very likely already carrying guns too, and I don't think they're anywhere close to being fully aware to the repercussions of their actions.

My reasoning goes along the lines where after you're 18 years old and you kill somebody, your liability is no different than if you're 21. So you get the responsibilities, but you don't get the privileges.

CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 02:57 PM
or make him take off his clothes in front of you

Funny you should mention that.

He's one of those that when he pees in a urinal he drops his pants all the way down to his shoes.

very creepy.
































So is my nephew...:lol

boutons_deux
01-20-2012, 03:00 PM
I Got A Gun, Vote Me President

http://www.readersupportednews.org/images/stories/article_imgs5k/5547-rick-perry-brandishes-041510.jpg

dickless fuckoffs, every last one of them.

CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 03:01 PM
I personally wouldn't put it through that reasoning. After all, some 16 years old gangbangers are very likely already carrying guns too, and I don't think they're anywhere close to being fully aware to the repercussions of their actions.

My reasoning goes along the lines where after you're 18 years old and you kill somebody, your liability is no different than if you're 21. So you get the responsibilities, but you don't get the privileges.


Actually my big objection was the blanket assumption that you could limit a constitutional right to the home. If you can do that, why can't you say practicing religion in your home is fine but you can't do it in public at a church?

cantthinkofanything
01-20-2012, 03:12 PM
Funny you should mention that.

He's one of those that when he pees in a urinal he drops his pants all the way down to his shoes.

very creepy.


So is my nephew...:lol

:lol

z0sa
01-20-2012, 03:23 PM
dickless gun fetishists, fuck'em all, a shit stain on American civilization

nothing gets boutons as riled as people legally owning guns. i think he's scared. why? dunno.

mouse
01-20-2012, 03:30 PM
I wonder how many of us would still be alive if this forum was a live event and we all had Guns.

cantthinkofanything
01-20-2012, 03:37 PM
I wonder how many of us would still be alive if this forum was a live event and we all had Guns.

They've actually run this experiment.

1c0FN8ajIlY

z0sa
01-20-2012, 03:39 PM
who's Mr. Pink (and why do they have to be pink)?

Mr.Kotter
01-20-2012, 03:39 PM
QVS3WNt7yRU

:tu

ElNono
01-20-2012, 03:42 PM
Actually my big objection was the blanket assumption that you could limit a constitutional right to the home. If you can do that, why can't you say practicing religion in your home is fine but you can't do it in public at a church?

I don't think there's anything necessarily precluding the judge from interpreting as he see fits. I mean, precedent always plays a role in decisions like this but only in a advisory capacity. Ultimately, that's the reason there's appeals courts and ultimately the Supreme Court, in order to revise some of these interpretations and set them straight.

Blake
01-20-2012, 04:13 PM
My opinion?

If the second amendment rights don't extend pas the home, what OTHER constitutional rights are also limited by this framework? I'm no legal scholar but this ruling seems to make no sense.

it's not an uncommon ruling of late


Now, the National Rifle Assn. is asking the high court to take up the issue this fall and "correct the widespread misapprehension that the 2nd Amendment's scope does not extend beyond the home."

Stephen Halbrook, an NRA lawyer, said "some judges have buried their heads in the sand and have refused to go one step further" than saying there is a right to have a gun at home.

The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence hailed the trend and called the high court's rulings a "hollow victory" for gun enthusiasts. "The gun lobby has tried to expand [the 2nd Amendment] into a broad right to carry any type of gun anywhere. And they have been almost unanimously rejected by the courts," said Jonathan Lowy, director of legal action. He conceded, however, that "this battle is far from over."

The uncertainty began with the Supreme Court itself. In 2008, Justice Antonin Scalia said the history of the 2nd Amendment shows it "guarantees the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation." But other parts of his 5-4 opinion stressed there is no right to "carry any weapon in any manner," and that bans on "carrying concealed weapons were lawful" in the 19th century.

...........

State judges in Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts and New York have also ruled recently that there is no constitutional right to carry a loaded gun for self-defense. And in Virginia, the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the federal conviction of a man who fell asleep in his car near Washington's Reagan National Airport with a loaded gun.



.....

http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/27/nation/la-na-court-guns-20110827

Blake
01-20-2012, 04:14 PM
is bullshit. are 18 year olds adults or what?

I can see not letting em have a gun until they're of age to drink as well, but it sucks for the 18 year old. They have all of the liability but few of the attached privileges and prerogatives. between the ages of 18 and 21 it's like one inhabits a slightly defective state of adulthood.

Why is it this way?

Because insurance companies and law enforcement, continually in the ears of public officials, say its best for us. That's bull. Either extend childhood to age 21, or confer total adulthood at 18. training wheels for adulthood sucks.

especially considering we train 18 year olds to use guns before sending them off to war.

ElNono
01-20-2012, 04:27 PM
I would add that it doesn't help that the 2nd Amendment wording is so vague...

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

boutons_deux
01-20-2012, 04:29 PM
18th "well regulated militia" now means, 21st century, that any private gun dealer can sell to anybody and nobody regulates anything. "strict constructionism/original intent" my ass.

Winehole23
01-20-2012, 04:33 PM
especially considering we train 18 year olds to use guns before sending them off to war.I've no problem with training as a requirement.

CosmicCowboy
01-20-2012, 04:44 PM
I've no problem with training as a requirement.

That's the point of the concealed carry training.

JoeChalupa
01-20-2012, 05:45 PM
I concur that the wording of the second amendment is vague and so is open to interpretation and ruling.

mouse
01-20-2012, 06:26 PM
They've actually run this experiment.

1c0FN8ajIlY

:lmao

/thread

Wild Cobra
01-20-2012, 08:56 PM
My opinion?

If the second amendment rights don't extend pas the home, what OTHER constitutional rights are also limited by this framework? I'm no legal scholar but this ruling seems to make no sense.
I don't see a problem with age appropriate legislation. It's already accepted in so many other areas of law.

mouse
01-20-2012, 09:30 PM
:tu


:lobt: