City's Proposed Gun Ban Could be Illegal

City's Proposed Gun Ban Could be Illegal

There are 106 comments on the NBC Philadelphia story from Apr 2, 2013, titled City's Proposed Gun Ban Could be Illegal. In it, NBC Philadelphia reports that:

But as the city moves closer to making that a reality, other Pennsylvania municipalities are repealing similar bans over their legality.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NBC Philadelphia.

First Prev
of 6
Next Last
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#143 Apr 17, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't read very well, do you dolt?
"The national government is one of enumerated powers, and a power enumerated and delegated by the Constitution to Congress is comprehensive and complete, without other limitations than those found in the Constitution itself...."
"...The Constitution is a written instrument, and, as such, its meaning does not alter. Its language, as a grant of power to the national government, is general and, as changes come in social and political life, it embraces all new conditions within the scope of the powers conferred.
"In interpreting the Constitution, recourse must be had to the common law and also to the position of the framers of the instrument and what they must have understood to be the meaning and scope of the grants of power contained therein must be considered...."---U.S. Supreme Court, South Carolina v. United States, 199 U.S. 437 (1905).
and nothing in your statement is contained in the Constitution.
however you shoot yourself in the foot by now claiming the Court can interpret the Constitution.
something you claimed the Supreme Court has no power to do.
therefore the Supreme Court CAN interpret the Constitution and there is no clause in the Constitution telling the Court how they interpret the Constitution.
in other words the justice's can choose their own method to interpret the Constitution.
they are under no obligation to refer or consider anyone's commentary.
that being the case the Federalist papers have no legal standing at all.
so you are still trying to sell snake oil.
show the clause in the Constitution that requires the Supreme Court to refer to anyone's commentary.

dbar

Quakertown, PA

#145 Apr 17, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
They are BOUND by solemn oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, dolt. And they can be removed from the bench for bad behavior. And ruling unconstitutionally is MOST DEFINITELY "bad behavior".
Go away, you pathetic child.
and they defend the Constitution by interpreting the Constitution based upon their opinion.
again they have no requirement to heed anyone's commentary.
care to mention the Supreme Court justice who was removed from the bench based upon their decisions?

dbar

Quakertown, PA

#147 Apr 17, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
U.S. Constitution: Article III, Section 2
"...In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make."
>YOU< are a total IGNORAMUS.
"The adversaries of the Constitution seem to have lost sight of the people altogether in their reasonings on this subject; and to have viewed these different establishments, not only as mutual rivals and enemies, but as uncontrolled by any common superior in their efforts to usurp the authorities of each other. These gentlemen must here be reminded of their error. They must be told that the ULTIMATE AUTHORITY, wherever the derivative may be found, RESIDES IN THE PEOPLE ALONE, and that it will not depend merely on the comparative ambition or address of the different governments, whether either, or which of them, will be able to enlarge its sphere of jurisdiction at the expense of the other. TRUTH, no less than decency, requires that the event in every case should be supposed to depend on the sentiments and sanction of their common constituents."--James Madison, The Federalist No. 46, Tuesday, January 29, 1788.
Do you understand the concept of FUNDAMENTAL LAW, you insipid dolt?
and where is "FUNDAMENTAL LAW" mentioned as the way the Supreme Court must base it's decisions listed in the Constitution?
and again the Federalist has no legal standing of any kind.
that commentary is just that.
no clause in the Constitution exists requiring the Supreme Court justices to base their decisions on anyone's commentary.
packing heat

Sellersville, PA

#148 Apr 18, 2013
I love key board commandos how about you calm down and put your energy into getting rid of illegal things. There is nothing wrong with laws just enforce them better.
dbar

Quakertown, PA

#150 Apr 18, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
Here. look what your 'master' is doing, knave:
"...But of course we don't have any extra money to spend on infrastructure because of our reckless spending and because of the massive amount of debt that we have accumulated. >>>>>>> >>>While the Obama administration is spending more than half a million dollars to figure out why chimpanzees throw poop<<<<<< <<<<, our national infrastructure is literally falling apart all around us. Once upon a time nobody else on the planet could match our infrastructure, and now we are in the process of becoming a joke to the rest of the world...."
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/2...
>>>>>>> >>>While the Obama administration is spending more than half a million dollars to figure out why chimpanzees throw poop<<<<<< <<<<
They want to figure out "why" so that they can become better at doing it themselves. Democrats = Feces flinging monkeys.
well for starters Congress refused to fund the infrastructure bill.
And Congress funds the NIH.

so you are targeting the wrong guy.

Congress writes the checks.
try reading the Constitution.
Out of Gas

Quakertown, PA

#151 Apr 19, 2013
diesel wrote:
<quoted text>
So guilty until proven innocent? I do assume the worst in people and why I chose to acquire my CCW and carry a firearm daily.
Using your logic, why does law enforcement bother to carry a weapon. If they simply spent more time in the gym they'd be more able to defend themselves.
Any gun owner would not spout this info. out on such a crap board. Stop acting tough with your words ! People who carry don't tell their best friends , when packing on a day outing .Why run the risk of scaring a friend . IDIOT STFU

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Monroe County Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Don't criminalize desperate mothers (Jan '15) Sep '15 Parent 3
News Eric Frein manhunt turns up explosives (Oct '14) Dec '14 Squach 29
News Eric Frein search: Stolen Porsche not linked to... (Oct '14) Oct '14 lady 2
News Truck driver accused of punching other driver a... (May '14) May '14 advise 2
News Homeless shelter on Stroud Zoning agenda tonight (Nov '13) Nov '13 pocono record stinks 1
Aaryn Terveen (Oct '13) Oct '13 Ghsgd39348 1
News NY murder suspect arrested in Poconos (Oct '13) Oct '13 AunieEm2 1
More from around the web