@78

Your post took up more than a page. Thus I just close the tab.

#11 What? I guess I'm dense, clueless, etc .. .

I don't think I've ever voted for Cornyn except possibly as a TSC justice. In this runoff I'll vote for Cornyn, Paxton is a criminal sleaze. In the general I'll vote for anyone but Cornyn or Paxton.

I paid $3.85 (card) a couple days ago at 1960 and Kenswick. I passed $3.79 (cash) as well as $4+ (card).

Not as bad as $4.50+ diesel several years back.

Biden pardoned his entire family.

A "core constitutional" power of the presidency that holds absolute immunity to him in all capacities.

I'm really not seeing a problem with this one assuming the Buffoon follows traditional protocol. A story I read is the current helicopter model has been phased out, some time ago. The replacement model's exhaust burns the grass so only the old model lands on the White House grounds. Thus a need rather than want. A helipad should be a relatively inexpensive project absent Buffoon tinkering.

I'm not a lawyer, but it appears people often do something similar with the Constitution.

I can agree with that.

Regarding ICE specifically, sometimes judicial warrants are required and sometimes they aren't, depending on the situation and the laws involved.

I can also agree with that until you hit every day Fourth Amendment stuff which is what this Buffoon stupid is about.

Where we diverge is your fundamental naive ignorance of Fourth Amendment doctrine. Regarding the topic, ICE, administrative and judicial warrants, any cop with "probable cause" can arrest anyone in any place where the cop has a right or permission to be. Period end of sentence. The problem with ICE administrative warrants, and this administrations policy, is it blatantly violates "the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

It does not take legal training to discern the difference between "public and and permitted" and private "persons, houses, papers, and effects" that require a judicial warrant. The Buffoon's policy is just ignore the law and do what I want.

Your naivete supports it.

So, a political scientist lawyer that has never practiced but teaches opines the sky is falling and littles run around like their heads have been cut off. (btw the meme is real, the body really does run wild)

Rather than explain the basis of his opinion he offers conclusions without substantial analysis. Weak from a supposed notable professor.

In any event, this political scientist lawyer that has practiced for a little over 40 years thinks the professor is full of s**t. I have previously explained why, regarding each of the cases he writes about, many times.

#8

870

Why not a pump? I have a Remington 800, the cheaper one not the fancy one.

#72 gtbritishskull

Seems to me the intent of the Reconstruction Amendments was to give all persons the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Originalism is an interpretive tool tied to text and history. Text and history do not change with the living of our lives. "Living" constitutionalism is the exemplar of "I know it when I see it." IOW, I'll just make it up as I go along. At least, originalism is tied to some kind of principle and it cuts both ways.

... they weren't a personality or lifestyle?

No, they just were. It just wasn't a topic of conversation other than safety and proper use.

At 6 I received my first Red Rider. At 10 my first shotgun, a 410. At 12 a 20 gauge. At 15 my friend rode behind me on my Yamaha 80 with my 20 gauge hung over his shoulder. No one ever said a word. Later, I drove around town with that shot gun and a Marlin 30-30 hanging on the gun rack of my truck. No one ever said a word. Guns just exist in my life. The only place they are a topic of discussion for me is here.

I'm at a loss to describe my childhood Second Amendment experience. It did not exist. There were guns around us but it wasn't big deal. It just was. We handled and shot guns. It was nothing. No one gave it second thought.

gtbritishskull, hope I typed that right.

Your general take that the Second Amendment originally applied to the feds is correct. However the text of the Reconstruction Amendments changed that. It took court precedent a while to come to grips, incorporation, with that change. You don't have to be and originalist, interpretive, it took a while, to conclude text changes s**t.

#36

Another guffaw from an ignorant twit that rattles of "show me in the Constitution" this or that can or can't ... A twit that doesn't comprehend the Constitution is written to formulate a functioning government not to formulate governance. That doesn't understand that American governance it informed by the history and traditions of English common law we brought with us. That the lack of comprehension and understanding displayed reveals the twit has never read the text of Article III, that grants judicial power of "precedent" nor English common law governance of court precedence.

BTW, I generally agree with you about the scope of "arms" encompassed by the Second Amendment. We may diverge at concepts of "dangerous and unusual," which covers the idiots bringing up cannons, missiles and nukes. See also "dangerous persons" and "sensitive places."

I've never voted for politician Cornyn because I don't vote for former judges for political office. But I will in this primary because Paxton is beyond the pale.

It is concerning that political appointees of the Buffoon are willing to engage in revenge prosecutions.

More concerning to me is there are front line DOJ lawyers willing to advance this s**t.

I'd guess before June.

Another Buffoon DOJ crash and burn in the waiting. It's coming.

SPLC not disclosing it's means and methods of f*****g over racists is a fraud upon donor's that wanted to f**k over racists? I'm sure the donors are devastated to learn this insignificant information.

Frickin' journalists' and their editors. Just say what happened and avoid the bs.

No, the judge did not allow Comey to bring her suit. She done done that and it don't take a judge to do it. What happened is the court denied the government's motion to dismiss. A routine happening that means the case continues forward as would have happened without the motion to dismiss.

That and just another, becoming routine, Buffoon DOJ crash and burn. Read the article for their dumba**ery.

This not some grand victory. It's a procedural ruling that holds the status quo while the court decides the merits.

I'm guessing about 6-8 weeks before this one is also dismissed.

#2 Posted by ClownShack