Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: The Judge slams Red Coat gun confiscations.

  1. #1

    The Judge slams Red Coat gun confiscations.

    https://www.foxnews.com/media/judge-...s-constitution

    Napolitano said the behavior was "reprehensible," but any legislative change must adhere to the Constitution.

    "Honest, decent, law-abiding people should not lose their rights because some judge thinks they might do something in the future. That's the Soviet Union model, not the American," he responded.

    "The theory of the Constitution is we don't punish people or take their rights away from them because of what they might do, what they could do, because of what we fear they'll do, but only because of what they have done," he said,
    $#@!ing beautiful.
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Bump for @Swordsmyth

    Quite the contrary to Donald Trump.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  4. #3
    "Red Coat Gun Confiscations"? Like taking them from the British?

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    The quality seems to have dropped significantly since I came here, I guess you get what you pay for.
    "There is always a tweet. That has become accepted fact in the Trump presidency: For every pronouncement the President makes, there is at least one tweet from his past that directly contradicts his current view." -CNN

    I am Zippy and I approve of this post. But you don't have to.

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post
    "Red Coat Gun Confiscations"? Like taking them from the British?

    Please don't be coy.

    he's talking about when they tried to take them from us at Lexington Green... G zippy, your sauce is getting kind of weak

    why I should worship the state (who apparently is the only party that can possess guns without question).
    The state's only purpose is to kill and control. Why do you worship it? - Sola_Fide

    Baptiste said.
    At which point will Americans realize that creating an unaccountable institution that is able to pass its liability on to tax-payers is immoral and attracts sociopaths?

  6. #5
    Napolitano said the behavior was "reprehensible," but any legislative change must adhere to the Constitution.

    "Honest, decent, law-abiding people should not lose their rights because some judge thinks they might do something in the future. That's the Soviet Union model, not the American," he responded.

    "The theory of the Constitution is we don't punish people or take their rights away from them because of what they might do, what they could do, because of what we fear they'll do, but only because of what they have done," he said,
    That's weird....

    https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...stI/story.html

    The bullets flew between two cars, shattering a weekday afternoon in Cambridgeport — and it didn’t stop there. The “gun battle” moved toward Central Square, drawing marked police cars into a chase and finally, authorities say, an arrest two miles away.

    But police said they immediately faced a frustrating reality that November day. They charged the alleged gunman with a felony because he didn’t have a gun license. But for allegedly spraying bullets into a residential neighborhood? Police could charge him with discharging a firearm within 500 feet of a building — which carries all of a three-month sentence.

    “It’s a misdemeanor,” said Cambridge Police Commissioner Branville G. Bard.

    Police and prosecutors pushed to change that Tuesday during a wide-ranging hearing that filled two rooms with advocates, legislators, and other officials, all pushing dozens of proposals designed to remake parts of Massachusetts’ already strict gun laws.

    That includes Bard and Marian Ryan, the Middlesex County District Attorney, who asked lawmakers to subject anyone who intentionally or “recklessly” fires a gun — and poses a risk of injury to others — to a new felony statute that would carry up to five years in prison.

    “This is a very common-sense measure that closes a gap in our law,” said Ryan, who described gunfire spewing from a car window last November as other people shopped at a nearby mall.

    Massachusetts lawmakers have taken several steps to pad Massachusetts’ famously tight gun statutes in recent years, including banning bump stocks, creating an avenue for “red flag” petitions, and adding the state to a national database for background checks.

    But as frustration mounts over inaction in Washington amid a growing list of mass shootings, debate rages even in Massachusetts over what changes can still be made here. And there are many, according to those who testified Tuesday.

    The various bills ranged from setting up a process to analyze the data the state is collecting on firearms in Massachusetts to clamping down on so-called “ghost guns,” such as those assembled by ordering various firearm parts, by requiring they be given a unique serial number.

    The legislation was filed in the wake of another arrest in Cambridge, where police say they recovered dozens of guns after a man — who did not have a license to carry firearms — allegedly ordered parts from dealers across the country. The investigation began after US Postal Service said it delivered 75 packages to his home, with items worth about $26,000 from firearm manufacturers.

    Several Boston lawmakers and officials testified that the state can also do more in preventing not just the next potential mass shooting, but the gun violence that already peppers its own cities. “We do have power here today to tackle the issue of the illegal gun market, and make sure that we are taking steps to address that problem,” said state Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz.

    Representative Chynah Tyler, a Roxbury Democrat, filed four bills that have the backing of Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins, including one that would limit most gun buyers — not including law enforcement, for example — from purchasing more than one firearm in a 30-day period.

    Boston Police Commissioner William G. Gross asked lawmakers to consider two different bills that he said could beef up information-sharing among police departments and allow the city to assess fees and fines on those whose cars are used to transport illegally owned guns.

    The city, Gross said, has collected more than 4,000 firearms in the last five years, including more than 2,800 that police consider “crime guns.”

    “One homicide is too many, one shooting’s too many,” he told the Joint Committee on Public Safety and Homeland Security toward the end of his testimony.

    Jim Wallace, executive director of the Gun Owners Action League of Massachusetts, argued that the state’s laws have been ineffective in preventing shootings and too often punish those who legally own guns.

    One measure proposed by Representative David P. Linsky would require those seeking a license to undergo several hours of live firearm training, including shooting at least 50 rounds of ammunition. Linsky equated the state’s current gun laws to allowing someone to get their driver’s license without first taking a road test.

    Wallace, however, argued that accidental shootings among those licensed to carry are rare. The proposal, he said, tries to address a “problem that doesn’t exist” and is simply another mandate on prospective gun owners.

    “Please don’t regulate guns like cars,” Wallace said. “I often joke that if you come to one of our shooting ranges and you see a sign that says no texting and shooting, then you can come talk to us about firearm safety.”

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    Bump for @Swordsmyth

    Quite the contrary to Donald Trump.
    I have repeatedly criticized Trump on this issue and if he actually signs something I will no longer consider him more good than bad.
    Judge Swamp isn't washed clean of his treason and perversions of the Constitution just because he knocks a softball out of the park to try and maintain his cover.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    I have repeatedly criticized Trump on this issue and if he actually signs something I will no longer consider him more good than bad.
    Judge Swamp isn't washed clean of his treason and perversions of the Constitution just because he knocks a softball out of the park to try and maintain his cover.
    In this day in age, it isn't necessarily a soft ball.

    Hence why seasoned veterans of the political sphere are wavering on this issue this time.

    To be fair, you have criticized Trump for this so maybe my remark was a cheap shot.

    "Treason" by the Napster is a cheap shot as well.
    Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 08-28-2019 at 04:24 PM.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by jkr View Post
    Please don't be coy.

    he's talking about when they tried to take them from us at Lexington Green... G zippy, your sauce is getting kind of weak
    The Zippy of past would have at least provided a graph with some plausible yet ridiculous example to where you might even think he was just a devil’s advocate rather than the Devil’s advocate but anymore it seems he is just tired.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    In this day in age, it isn't necessarily a soft ball.

    Hence while seasoned veterans of the political sphere are wavering on this issue this time.

    To be fair, you have criticized Trump for this so maybe my remark was a cheap shot.

    "Treason" by the Napster is a cheap shot as well.
    He participated in an attempted overthrow of the rightful President of the US in a coup involving foreign enemies, that's treason.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    He participated in an attempted overthrow of the rightful President of the US in a coup involving foreign enemies, that's treason.
    Scary stuff.

    When you say "foreign" are you speaking in terms of unknown?
    Last edited by kcchiefs6465; 08-28-2019 at 04:25 PM.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    Scary stuff.

    When you say "foreign" are you are speaking in terms of unknown?
    No, the UK is deeply involved as is Australia and Ukraine among others.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  14. #12
    I think it's safe to say they already have the 'model' for the next alphabet Federal Agency
    drawn out , ready to put in place.

    The Red Coat name should be changed to Turncoat Confiscation Brigade.


    The new agency's name; TCB*





    *BTO

  15. #13
    Arguably, red flag laws are a softball because they will end up violating the 2nd & 4th amendments unless extremely narrowly written at which point they become useless.

    http://www.judgenap.com/post/the-dan...o-do-something
    These arguments against confiscation have largely resonated with Republicans. Yet — because they feel they must do something — they have fallen for the concept of limited confiscation, known by the euphemism of "red flag" laws.

    The concept of a "red flag" law — which permits the confiscation of lawfully owned weapons from a person because of what the person might do — violates both the presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of proof of criminal behavior before liberty can be infringed.

    The presumption of innocence puts the burden for proving a case on the government. Because the case to be proven — might the gun owner be dangerous? — if proven, will result in the loss of a fundamental liberty, the presumption of innocence also mandates that the case be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The Republican proposal lowers the standard of proof to a preponderance of the evidence — "a more likely than not" standard. That was done because it is impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an event might happen. This is exactly why the might happen standard is unconstitutional and alien to our jurisprudence.
    XNN
    "They sell us the president the same way they sell us our clothes and our cars. They sell us every thing from youth to religion the same time they sell us our wars. I want to know who the men in the shadows are. I want to hear somebody asking them why. They can be counted on to tell us who our enemies are but theyre never the ones to fight or to die." - Jackson Browne Lives In The Balance

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by XNavyNuke View Post
    Arguably, red flag laws are a softball because they will end up violating the 2nd & 4th amendments unless extremely narrowly written at which point they become useless.

    http://www.judgenap.com/post/the-dan...o-do-something

    These arguments against confiscation have largely resonated with Republicans. Yet — because they feel they must do something — they have fallen for the concept of limited confiscation, known by the euphemism of "red flag" laws.

    The concept of a "red flag" law — which permits the confiscation of lawfully owned weapons from a person because of what the person might do — violates both the presumption of innocence and the due process requirement of proof of criminal behavior before liberty can be infringed.

    The presumption of innocence puts the burden for proving a case on the government. Because the case to be proven — might the gun owner be dangerous? — if proven, will result in the loss of a fundamental liberty, the presumption of innocence also mandates that the case be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

    The Republican proposal lowers the standard of proof to a preponderance of the evidence — "a more likely than not" standard. That was done because it is impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that an event might happen. This is exactly why the might happen standard is unconstitutional and alien to our jurisprudence.
    XNN

    $#@!ing love The Judge.
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    In this day in age, it isn't necessarily a soft ball.

    Hence why seasoned veterans of the political sphere are wavering on this issue this time.

    To be fair, you have criticized Trump for this so maybe my remark was a cheap shot.

    "Treason" by the Napster is a cheap shot as well.
    Who are some of the seasoned veterans wavering on the issue?

    Not asking to challenge, just legitimately curious.
    "An idea whose time has come cannot be stopped by any army or any government" - Ron Paul.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by unknown View Post
    Who are some of the seasoned veterans wavering on the issue?

    Not asking to challenge, just legitimately curious.
    Rand Paul, arguably speaking of red flag support if the proper checks and balances are in place.

    I am reading some into it. People close to me (avid 2nd Amendment folk) seem to be a little tired of the phenomena of these random shooters.

    They often have no concept of the DSM IV (and the over medication of society in general or what constitutes a mental disorder) or the current state of family courts and simply check the box of caring about the victims without a solid foundational understanding of the issue.

    The republican in office adds fuel to these political shows.

    Whether that is the mainstream news coverage and the narrative that is there or simply solidifying a base of, quite frankly, ignorant and shortsighted fools.
    “The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.” --George Orwell

    Quote Originally Posted by AuH20 View Post
    In terms of a full spectrum candidate, Rand is leaps and bounds above Trump. I'm not disputing that.
    Who else in public life has called for a pre-emptive strike on North Korea?--Donald Trump



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.


Similar Threads

  1. Federal judge slams Obama lawyers in immigration case
    By morfeeis in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-08-2015, 02:31 PM
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-30-2013, 04:52 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-04-2012, 04:23 PM
  4. Judge Napolitano slams Jeff Flake (R-AZ)
    By Matt Collins in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 11-30-2012, 01:44 PM
  5. Judge Napolitano Praises Ron Paul's Rally, Slams Bailout
    By Throwback280s in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 10-04-2008, 12:56 PM

Posting Permissions

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