Red Wind
Member
I don't think you will live to see that morning.
That is true and, starting today here in Kansas, we can carry concealed without a permit.Gun rights views have not changed much even after a cooling off period following Sandy Hook. The changes if they occur would happen at the State level now.
I'm not sure you understand the significance of the battle flag in Mississippi lol. This issue could easily lead to a killin' or two, can swing elections. Not only is the "Rebel" flag flown everywhere the state flag is (it's after all a major part of it), there are Confederate memorials on most if not all of the county courthouse lawns in the state. Judging from the general atmosphere of the debate I think it will be taken off the flag at some point...and the parallels to the gun issue are very close. You don't have to convince 50% or even 25%of the population to switch their support on issues this contentious; a 10% swing could lead to very real difficulties for 2A folks. While there is no doubt we are in better shape than even five years ago, I have no illusions that it couldn't change very radically and much faster than most expect. This change wouldn't come at the state level (in most states) but at the federal, if the right SCOTUS judge unexpectedly died tonight the issue could be up for grabs again IMO."To go with the comparison in the OP, the debate on the battle flag being on the Mississippi state flag is absolutely on fire here, it's on every local newscast, every day."
Flags are a lot cheaper than guns, so fewer people care to defend the issue. Everyone involved knows they are simply out for a few cheap, symbolic victories, and won't be able to affect anything meaningful.
"The flag discussion is relevant just as Trump being fired from the network and Miss Universe being canceled on another."
Case in point, two other issues hardly anyone cares about enough to defend.
Gun rights are seeing the strongest support they've had, probably since at least the Bonus Army days if not the Civil War, for cryin' out loud. Even if the SCOTUS is presented with another trillion-dollar bill that is too big to fail (the price of our judiciary, it seems), this time regarding gun control, they'll be hard pressed to do anything but neuter it.
"As far as I'm concerned we are treading on new ground, I think recent SCOTUS decisions will only help to embolden those who wish to force this minority view change upon us all."
True, but opinion is still opinion outside the digital sphere, at the end of the day, and it doesn't change as much as we all pretend. You might see 'sweeping' regulations passed, but they won't be enforced outside the usual places. All that will happen is the gradual delegitimization of governance as we all become criminals out of reach of an impotent State. Power stems from the consent of the governed, and so long as this truth is known, the problem is ultimately self-regulating.
I still don't see anything short of a very high-profile assassination causing anything of this sort, and our fearless leaders are too paranoid at this point to let that befall them.
"Fast forward to just over a week ago and all of a sudden everyone seems to be on board with not only bringing the flag down but erasing it from store shelves and television screens"
Is that 'everyone' actually located in South Carolina? I've seen an awful lot of condemnation from folks who literally have no skin in the game, whatsoever, and are simply belching from a thousand miles north or farther. I'm in Texas, and think the flag is in bad taste, but assume that it probably carries some measure of legitimate significance over in the seat of the Confederacy if it garnered the kind of political support it has until recently (not unlike the Alamo, which is a very insensitive symbol of a Mexican war crime and ultimate defeat). The only change is by politicians pandering to that national audience, with visions of broader appeal and the higher office it represents tantalizing their senses (Haley)
TCB
Much depends on political agendas of justices that eventually hear the deciding case.
I'll go with that to an extent. Bu I'm beginning to think even Kennedy doesn't know what he thinks. His agenda seems to be to just wing it.^^ I fixed that for you.
Like the 3x5 on my front porch? I have never owned a Confederate flag until this week.All of a sudden I'm seeing confederate flags where I never saw flags before. I could care less if the confederate flag was taken down on SC government buildings.
But it's not appropriate to get too into that here I guess.
While we may not know everything that the justices are thinking, they do write opinions when deciding cases. When their decisions as well as the opinions they write are clearly in contrast to the law as well as the Constitution, there's a problem. They do decide many cases where the law can honestly be interpreted different ways. The Obamacare decisions were not such cases.Everyone is entitled to their opinion as to why SCOTUS rules the way it does. Only SCOTUS knows for sure and even though they try to explain it, a lot of people still prefer their own opinion. Of course, often with 5-4 decisions, slightly less than half the Court often feels the same way as everyone else.
ATLDave said:"OK, US News and World Report has published an article on gun control that calls the recent event "The tipping point" in favor of gun control. "
Cite/link? And what's their basis for that? The polling that I have seen indicates that while 40-45% really want more gun control, the majority don't. USN&WR can declare a "tipping point" if they want - the question is what proof do they have? Their subjective feelings (or the feelings of their columnist) aren't proof.
Boy, people who have not had any legal training sure get turned around on stuff. "State's rights" means the rights of states to enact laws to restrict individuals. The argument of, say, NY in support of its SAFE Act is a state's right's argument... a claim that they, as a state, have the right to enact regulations regarding firearms.
OK, US News and World Report has published an article on gun control that calls the recent event "The tipping point" in favor of gun control.
Hmmm. I see nothing in your response that contradicts what I wrote.While we may not know everything that the justices are thinking, they do write opinions when deciding cases. When their decisions as well as the opinions they write are clearly in contrast to the law as well as the Constitution, there's a problem. They do decide many cases where the law can honestly be interpreted different ways. The Obamacare decisions were not such cases.
My point is not to enter into a political debate, as this is not the forum to do so, but that a shift in public opinion may not be necessary for us to lose our rights as gun owners, as the courts have demonstrated to anyone objectively looking at recent decisions that the law currently does not mean much if enough political pressure is put on the justices.
That wasn't my intent. The point I was trying to clarify is that some of the recent decisions by SCOTUS fly in the face of the law. If enough political pressure is placed on them, public opinion or the law won't stop them from trampling gun owner's rights.Hmmm. I see nothing in your response that contradicts what I wrote.
It's July.Hunting and other sporting purpose gun sales are dropping off in my store. I think that's a major change.