|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
April 19, 2013, 10:46 AM | #451 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Quote:
A gov't official could have:
It used to be that there was a "good faith" element to qualified immunity. That's now gone (in the 8th circuit, anyway), and there's a reasonableness immunity. You also have to look at whether the right violated was "clearly established" at the time of violation. So yeah, I can see how it might look like a hodgepodge.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
April 19, 2013, 11:04 AM | #452 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
I'm starting to think I should just audit your class for a couple years. Of course, given how often I see people screaming the mods took away their free speech right, and so forth, I think everybody should "audit" your class in high school as part of the curriculum. We don't seem to have enough knowledge of our own basic laws as we should.
|
April 19, 2013, 11:07 AM | #453 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Actually, we only touch on that stuff in my class. You should see my students' eyes when I tell them: "Yeah, the A5 says that you have to indict by Grand Jury, but that part doesn't apply to Arkansas."
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
April 19, 2013, 11:11 AM | #454 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
It hasn't been incorporated, though I think at least most of the rest of the 5A has been. I think all of the 1A, 2A, and 4A have been. The 3A has not been, but it's a pretty much forgotten amendment right now. The only way it would be ripe for incorporation is if someone complains at being forced to house Natl. Guard during a Hurricane Sandy type disaster event.
|
April 19, 2013, 11:18 AM | #455 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
April 19, 2013, 11:34 AM | #456 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Actually let me back track, the requirements for a warrant may not be incorporated either. You may not have to affirm by oath or affidavit everywhere, I'd have to look that up.
Of course all of this sidetracks us from the point I was making, in that too many of us don't really know what our rights are. Or the actual conversation we were having so without further ado: Quote:
|
|
April 19, 2013, 12:38 PM | #457 |
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Austin, CO
Posts: 19,578
|
I hope you're right, Jim, but this is only one issues and there are hundreds of others that are in logically/legally worse places.
The gun rights side of the commerce clause doesn't even reach "tip of the iceberg" status. It's more like a snowflake in a blizzard.
__________________
Nobody plans to screw up their lives... ...they just don't plan not to. -Andy Stanley |
April 19, 2013, 02:44 PM | #458 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
|
Quote:
|
|
April 19, 2013, 03:06 PM | #459 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Is that why in cases where the Federal Government is the respondent, it's usually the Attorney General or other Cabinet Officer, rather than the United States, but when the Federal Government is the appellant the case is usually the United States v ______?
|
April 19, 2013, 03:36 PM | #460 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Quote:
Cities themselves do not have the immunity. However, their agents and officers may have some type of immunity (for example, a city police officer may have qualified immunity, or a city prosecutor might have prosecutorial immunity). However, a municipality cannot be held liable for a constitutional violation unless it the plaintiff can show that the city had a policy, practice or custom that led to a constitutional violation. See Monell v. Dept of Human Services. Further, at least in the 8th Circuit, cities are immune from punitive damages. That's why you see things like "Plaintiff Joe Choirboy vs. Chief Billy Bob Knuckledragger, in his individual and official capacities." The Plaintiff is suing two ways: (a) official capacity (deeper pockets, but have to prove policy, practice or custom) and (b) individual capacity (opens the door on punitive damages).
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
April 19, 2013, 04:22 PM | #461 |
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Well cities and other political subdivisions don't have immunity because they're not a sovereign entity, not?
|
April 19, 2013, 04:26 PM | #462 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Yes.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
April 19, 2013, 08:31 PM | #463 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 26, 2005
Location: The Bluegrass
Posts: 9,137
|
Quote:
|
|
April 19, 2013, 10:34 PM | #464 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 29, 2004
Location: South West OHIO (boondocks)
Posts: 1,337
|
Quote:
The problem is, criminals do not fear being criminals, and "honest" men who would make "mistakes" against honest men all too often do not fear repercussion either. Else why would we have supposed representatives and others in government who do not lend ear to the people, or fear what will happen if they don't? You can claim you are acting in my best interest all you want, or that it's for the children, or my own good, but it's hard to believe you when you are taking things that belong to me, and trampling my rights. I can never see such actions as being for my own good. God created me, and gave me my own rights, and my own ability to decide what is good for me. It just so happens that a great deal of those rights were recognized by our brilliant founders, and enshrined in our foundational documents. I will not see them stripped from hand, or give them up willingly for false promises of compromise that is never, ever compromise, only control, and a tighter leash. |
|
April 19, 2013, 10:42 PM | #465 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 29, 2004
Location: South West OHIO (boondocks)
Posts: 1,337
|
Quote:
I, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God. Pay particular attention to the bolded section, and notice it comes first, and therefor takes precedence over the rest, if the rest threaten the first. Do ponder that won't you? |
|
April 19, 2013, 10:44 PM | #466 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 29, 2004
Location: South West OHIO (boondocks)
Posts: 1,337
|
Quote:
|
|
April 22, 2013, 01:12 PM | #467 | ||
Member
Join Date: October 15, 2002
Location: Arkansas, USA
Posts: 73
|
I'm a bit late on this, I've been gone for a while, just found my way back. But in response tothe OP
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject. - Marcus Aurelius - TFL Member #17104 |
||
April 22, 2013, 01:24 PM | #468 | |||
Senior Member
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
|
Welcome back, and doesn't Twitter do the strangest things?
Quote:
Quote:
You're also opening up HIPPA concerns for the general public, if someone is in treatment for a mental issue that provides a firearms disability, but not confinement for treatment... the government needs to know it, not the server bringing you a beer. Quote:
|
|||
April 22, 2013, 01:26 PM | #469 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 13,057
|
Quote:
And yet again, why bother? We went for over two centuries without background checks. The NICS system hasn't been proven to reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals, nor has it been shown to have any impact on crimes committed with guns.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change. --Randall Munroe |
|
April 22, 2013, 01:37 PM | #470 |
Member
Join Date: October 15, 2002
Location: Arkansas, USA
Posts: 73
|
LOL.
That's one of the reasons for putting it out this way. It's a "what's good for the goose is good for the gander" type of argument. If it is so "unintrusive" to make prospective gun owners go through it, then the rest of the "potential" Militia (All persons of able body capable of bearing arms in case of emergency) shouldn't have reason to object to it. That particularly applies to those who push so hard for it. For most of those 2 previous centuries, people lived in close enough knit communities, that everyone pretty much knew everyone else within their sphere of exposure. So anyone who was selling a gun would have known that billy bob was just a bit "not right" and would have first contacted the head of that family to find out why he needed one.
__________________
The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject. - Marcus Aurelius - TFL Member #17104 |
April 22, 2013, 01:54 PM | #471 | |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Quote:
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
|
April 22, 2013, 01:57 PM | #472 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 7, 2008
Location: Upper midwest
Posts: 5,631
|
It's immensely intrusive. Moreover, the NICS system isn't adequately funded, or enforced, as it stands; requiring the entire population to be checked by the system, and their records to be kept up to date, would be very expensive indeed.
Quote:
__________________
Never let anything mechanical know you're in a hurry. |
|
April 22, 2013, 02:01 PM | #473 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
|
One would think we'd have enough identity theft victims on TFL to produce a fair number of skeptics, too.
|
April 22, 2013, 02:07 PM | #474 |
Member
Join Date: October 15, 2002
Location: Arkansas, USA
Posts: 73
|
While I agree with you Spats, why must we have to go thought it each and every time, for each and every transaction (if certain parties have their way). Each time an NICS check is run, that's one more opportunity for some minimum wage part timer answering the phone to transpose a letter or number and hit you or I with a Deny response. Eventually it will happen.
As for the overwhelming load - I'm not sure I'm buying that excuse either. The difference between running NICS checks on 1/5 of the population 3 to 20 times each in the course of a few years is actually more than running the entire population over a 5 year period. After all, if we are to go by what the Founding Fathers discussed in the Federalist Papers, and enumerated in the 2nd Amendment - the intent was for every man to be armed and ready to come tothe call of his country. If there are some who, for one reason or another should not be burdened with that - for whatever reason (and I am not proposing that that reason be displayed on the photo ID) I think the average person should be able to be responsibly informed. But I also happen to think that if you can't be trusted with a gun, than you shouldn't be trusted to hold public office either....But that's just me. I'm just looking for one line "NICS = Pass" or "NICS = Deny" & there would be no "delay" nor obligation to explain.
__________________
The opinion of 10,000 men is of no value if none of them know anything about the subject. - Marcus Aurelius - TFL Member #17104 |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|