General Discussion

pipoman

(16,038 posts)

43. We don't regulate constitutional rights

Sat Jul 21, 2012, 03:03 PM

Jul 2012

based on humble opinions. The courts require some quantifiable proof that a proposal to limit civil liberties will have the effect those who are proposing the limitation proclaim. The test which has arisen in the high courts previously has been, is the item in question "in common use for lawful purposes". The statistical data on extended magazines would easily prove that they are in fact "in common use for lawful purposes". If the statistical standard required for regulation of a civil liberty/right were as low as the abuse rate of these magazines, there would be many things outlawed before extended magazines.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

the second amendment and "arms" [View all] arely staircase Jul 2012 OP

Any body who does not understand that the world we live in today randr Jul 2012 #1

How hard do you think it would be to amend the constitution to prevent individuals owning PoliticAverse Jul 2012 #2

iy isnt necessary arely staircase Jul 2012 #7

What arms were available when the second amendment was ratified? Richard D Jul 2012 #3

That means the First Amendment only applies to the forms of communication that then existed. former9thward Jul 2012 #8

Dang if they didn't screw up the 1st Amendment safeinOhio Jul 2012 #16

There are limits on commercial speech and obscenity as you know. former9thward Jul 2012 #26

not really arely staircase Jul 2012 #13

Exactly right. Zoeisright Jul 2012 #41

Not this tired old arguement again. rl6214 Jul 2012 #4

Why? ethereal1 Jul 2012 #5

"which does not exist" Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #6

That is not the point of ethereal1's post, as I am sure you are aware of. madinmaryland Jul 2012 #10

I get the whole root cause argument Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #12

+1 nt arely staircase Jul 2012 #14

That's all I was commenting about... madinmaryland Jul 2012 #30

Oh man. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #31

... madinmaryland Jul 2012 #34

That's a 'drum magazine' not a 'clip'. n/t PoliticAverse Jul 2012 #11

I know. That is a link to my thread where I posted it. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #15

I think in this case even if he had to change magazines several times it wouldn't have PoliticAverse Jul 2012 #27

It's not a 'clip' ethereal1 Jul 2012 #17

it is a clip arely staircase Jul 2012 #20

Incorrect. JeepJK556 Jul 2012 #22

it is in the vernacular arely staircase Jul 2012 #25

If someone uses the phrase "fifty round clip", give them a cookie and send them on their way. Tejas Jul 2012 #33

No... PoliticAverse Jul 2012 #24

do you believe the second arely staircase Jul 2012 #9

Exactly. n/t safeinOhio Jul 2012 #18

^^ This ^^ Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #32

They already do.. pipoman Jul 2012 #35

It's my understanding, that in the language of the period... Lizzie Poppet Jul 2012 #19

that is arely staircase Jul 2012 #23

Banning 100 round drums is pointless JeepJK556 Jul 2012 #21

Because.... ethereal1 Jul 2012 #28

personally i think 5 is reasonable arely staircase Jul 2012 #29

And I think 182 is reasonable pipoman Jul 2012 #36

so then we both believe in a limit arely staircase Jul 2012 #37

No, I didn't say I believe in a limit, pipoman Jul 2012 #38

so you think there is arely staircase Jul 2012 #39

No, I think there is no limit to magazine capacity pipoman Jul 2012 #40

what is the purpose of a high magazine capacity arely staircase Jul 2012 #42

We don't regulate constitutional rights pipoman Jul 2012 #43

we do indeed arely staircase Jul 2012 #44

When the 'arely staircase' acquaintance pipoman Jul 2012 #45