Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:03 am
So every fucking state is going to have morons walking around with concealed carry? That's fucking horrifying.
The short version is that "may issue" is dead. "May issue" means that states may issue a CCW license to qualified applicants but aren't obligated to do so. They can decide not to do so for any reason and it turns into a situation where an applicant needs to show overwhelming need or just pay the right people. States like NY, MA, NJ, are "may issue". Typically this is handled at the local law enforcement level so if you're pals with the local sheriff you're good and if he doesn't like you, you have no chance.
It doesn't eliminate the need to qualify for a CCW license if one is required. Not yet, anyway. Illinois, for example, requires a Firearm Owner ID (FOID) to apply for a CCL. It also requires background check by the state police and a certain number of hours in a certified class (16 hours, IIRC). But if you qualify and pass background, they can't decide not to issue. Local LE does have the option to send a denial recommendation to a review board but they don't get the final say.
This is "shall issue".
I imagine they'll go after CCW licenses and FOIDs next. Many states are "constitutional carry" meaning if you legally possess a gun you can carry it. No license required.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "No scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer." -Stigler's Law of Eponymy, discovered by Robert K. Merton MYT
So not totally the wild west, but we're getting there. Yay?
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.
Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:02 pm
So aside from Roe are there any other horrifying things they are going to drop on us in the next two weeks?
A few days ago I posted about a case that could decide the US territories are unconstitutional. Pretty big deal for those in PR, Guam, USVI, American Samoa, and the Marianas. They'd have to either petition for statehood or go independent.
Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:02 pm
So aside from Roe are there any other horrifying things they are going to drop on us in the next two weeks?
A few days ago I posted about a case that could decide the US territories are unconstitutional. Pretty big deal for those in PR, Guam, USVI, American Samoa, and the Marianas. They'd have to either petition for statehood or go independent.
So, would this be the catalyst (and time) to push for statehood, and that it's almost absurd for the US to make this claim and then leave them independent (unless they wanted that). In some way I can understand and get behind the idea of "put up or shut up" for these 'territories'. I mean you are either a part of these United States, or you are - what? Guantanamo? But I feel it's clear, like parental responsibilities, one could not justify just forcing these territories to suddenly become independent countries. That seems absurd.
Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:02 pm
So aside from Roe are there any other horrifying things they are going to drop on us in the next two weeks?
A few days ago I posted about a case that could decide the US territories are unconstitutional. Pretty big deal for those in PR, Guam, USVI, American Samoa, and the Marianas. They'd have to either petition for statehood or go independent.
So, would this be the catalyst (and time) to push for statehood, and that it's almost absurd for the US to make this claim and then leave them independent (unless they wanted that). In some way I can understand and get behind the idea of "put up or shut up" for these 'territories'. I mean you are either a part of these United States, or you are - what? Guantanamo? But I feel it's clear, like parental responsibilities, one could not justify just forcing these territories to suddenly become independent countries. That seems absurd.
SCOTUS is making policy now and they are beholden to no one.
Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 12:02 pm
So aside from Roe are there any other horrifying things they are going to drop on us in the next two weeks?
A few days ago I posted about a case that could decide the US territories are unconstitutional. Pretty big deal for those in PR, Guam, USVI, American Samoa, and the Marianas. They'd have to either petition for statehood or go independent.
So, would this be the catalyst (and time) to push for statehood, and that it's almost absurd for the US to make this claim and then leave them independent (unless they wanted that). In some way I can understand and get behind the idea of "put up or shut up" for these 'territories'. I mean you are either a part of these United States, or you are - what? Guantanamo? But I feel it's clear, like parental responsibilities, one could not justify just forcing these territories to suddenly become independent countries. That seems absurd.
SCOTUS is making policy now and they are beholden to no one.
Or they are, and they see the need to kick them out now - while they have the numbers.
The 18th-century fantasy of the US Constitution was this: a national Congress split among different local interest groups weighted by population (in the House) and wisdom (In the Senate), steered by a President beholden to the legislature, all of it subject to the philosophical wisdom of a Supreme Court made up of the agreed-upon best legal minds in the land.
If you were designing a role-playing game about government then this might seem reasonable, but if you were assessing it after almost a quarter-millennium of practice, what would you think?
Holman wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 9:01 pm
The 18th-century fantasy of the US Constitution was this: a national Congress split among different local interest groups weighted by population (in the House) and wisdom (In the Senate), steered by a President beholden to the legislature, all of it subject to the philosophical wisdom of a Supreme Court made up of the agreed-upon best legal minds in the land.
If you were designing a role-playing game about government then this might seem reasonable, but if you were assessing it after almost a quarter-millennium of practice, what would you think?
It's also important to note that this situation is one they were afraid of. They didn't believe that every person was responsible enough to vote. I'm obviously not going to advocate for rule by only the wealthy, white male land owner but granting suffrage to every person while maintaining the current republican system put us inevitably on a crash course for demagoguery.
Interesting thread on where the 2A cases may look for guidance in the future. If this is true, it's kind of like saying "ignore Thomas and carry on" in many cases.
Held: The Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe and Casey
are overruled; and the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the
people and their elected representatives. Pp. 8–79
213 pages is going to take a while to read. Watching Scotusblog comments while reading, it looks like Thomas would get rid of Griswold as well. So that's fun.
Yeah I'm reading experts who are diving into various section because too long to read today. Plus I don't want to more angry than I already am. I did see already that indicators are that this going to be parsed as worse than it looks. Stability wise. For example, the concurrence Roberts penned - that wasn't leaked - indicates that if McConnell hadn't have blocked Garland, we likely would have seen a 5-4 split where Roberts would have more moderately kept Roe alive. There will be widespread *justified* rage at this outcome. The court's legitimacy is in the toilet and it may very well lead to violence.
Last edited by malchior on Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
stessier wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:23 am
213 pages is going to take a while to read. Watching Scotusblog comments while reading, it looks like Thomas would get rid of Griswold as well. So that's fun.
In a solo concurring opinion, Thomas says the court should reconsider rulings that protect contraception, same-sex relationships, and same-sex marriage.
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.
Octavious wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:37 am
It's like the fucking Taliban rolling into town.
That's the upshot. Today very well will be remembered as the beginning of the end of a peaceful era. The United States very likely was shattered today.
Edit: I mean the birth of Gilead in a nation with hundreds of millions of guns? What can go wrong.
Last edited by malchior on Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
malchior wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:48 am
Does anyone ever think that Thomas thinks about how his marriage is probably unconstitutional? (by his own twisted logic that is)
Less that the marriage is unconstitutional and more that his state should be allowed to ban it, correct?
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.
malchior wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:48 am
Does anyone ever think that Thomas thinks about how his marriage is probably unconstitutional? (by his own twisted logic that is)
Less that the marriage is unconstitutional and more that his state should be allowed to ban it, correct?
Octavious wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:59 am
And yet the midterms will be about gas prices.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
Maybe. If the Democrats weren't incompetent politcos they'd have already prepared a campaign to channel this into a message about *packing the courts* and/or *codifying Roe* into law. Even if those aren't necessarily good ideas have high likelihood of happening. It is however a real issue they can run on that is going to concrete and grounded in reality to a lot of folks. This could be a gift to them. Let's hope they don't miss their opportunity. It's not like they got a goddamn tip off to what was going to happen. [/Double face palm].
Considering Biden is running around blaming all his problems on Putin I don't hold hope. Why haven't they been pointing out the tax cuts? The billions of dollars Trump dumped into the market? The pressure to not increase rates? Nothing. We honestly might have been better off with Trump winning and the economy going to shit under him at this point.
Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.
Octavious wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 2:58 pm
So not totally the wild west, but we're getting there. Yay?
The “Wild West” had better gun control laws.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.” - H.L. Mencken
I'll take Biden's incompetence over Trump's incompetence any day. It's all pointless anyway. The right have won control of this country. Now we watch as they try the impossible - implementing their regressive out of touch vision on an unwilling armed to the teeth population.
I'd argue the most heavily armed are totally on board with what they want.
Capitalism tries for a delicate balance: It attempts to work things out so that everyone gets just enough stuff to keep them from getting violent and trying to take other people’s stuff.
BTW this is why the Democratic party desperately needs new leadership. 'anticlimatic'?! It's a fucking revolution you out of touch do-nothing. I'm pretty sick of these super old politicians downplaying things when they don't have to live in the dark future they fucked up. Enough. If you think this isn't serious? Get the fuck out of the way for someone who gives a shit and can get something done.
Edit: Reframed by Chris Hayes - and I agree this is a generational issue.
Not that I want to springboard into Drazzil here, but you can see why he believes there are conspiracies and that the (D) party is somehow in on all this. Instead, it seems like what we're seeing out of touch elders that have little to no connection to what it means to exist as the average American.
Why aren't there headlines now about how the GOP has stripped rights from American women with today's decision?
Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:36 am
Not that I want to springboard into Drazzil here, but you can see why he believes there are conspiracies and that the (D) party is somehow in on all this. Instead, it seems like what we're seeing out of touch elders that have little to no connection to what it means to exist as the average American.
Why aren't there headlines now about how the GOP has stripped rights from American women with today's decision?
"It's anticlimactic" is the take here?
I don’t know that “anticlimactic” soundbite is deserving of all this fury. Is it so unreasonable to say the issuance of an opinion that was already leaked was anticlimactic?
On the other hand, I definitely question Clyburn’s state of mind when he says he’s hopeful about moving legislatively to counteract today’s decision overturning Roe. Given the current situation we find ourselves in, that seems . . . Out of touch.
Just 'cause you feel it, doesn't mean it's there -- Radiohead
Do you believe me? Do you trust me? Do you like me? 😳
malchior wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 10:26 am
Yeah I'm reading experts who are diving into various section because too long to read today. Plus I don't want to more angry than I already am. I did see already that indicators are that this going to be parsed as worse than it looks. Stability wise. For example, the concurrence Roberts penned - that wasn't leaked - indicates that if McConnell hadn't have blocked Garland, we likely would have seen a 5-4 split where Roberts would have more moderately kept Roe alive. There will be widespread *justified* rage at this outcome. The court's legitimacy is in the toilet and it may very well lead to violence.
In reference to your angry comment, I agree. I tried to read it, but I just can't today.
Smoove_B wrote: ↑Fri Jun 24, 2022 11:36 am
Not that I want to springboard into Drazzil here, but you can see why he believes there are conspiracies and that the (D) party is somehow in on all this. Instead, it seems like what we're seeing out of touch elders that have little to no connection to what it means to exist as the average American.
Why aren't there headlines now about how the GOP has stripped rights from American women with today's decision?
"It's anticlimactic" is the take here?
I don’t know that “anticlimactic” soundbite is deserving of all this fury. Is it so unreasonable to say the issuance of an opinion that was already leaked was anticlimactic?
On the other hand, I definitely question Clyburn’s state of mind when he says he’s hopeful about moving legislatively to counteract today’s decision overturning Roe. Given the current situation we find ourselves in, that seems . . . Out of touch.
I get what you are saying but it's simply a terrible choice of phrasing considering the circumstances. Words are important from leadership and he got this way wrong IMO. The energy is just all wrong. Now isn't the day to tell people (to paraphrase), "well we expected this defeat...let's start to study our next move." That's the problem! They are always behind the action.
