Moderator: Community Team
cmckinney wrote:From what I've heard, I think that the Supreme Court is gonna rule against banning handguns. I can understand banning assault rifles and the like, but if you ban handguns, you've completely destroyed the second amendment.
Juan, can you explain to me the ruling in favor of the oil companies?
Nobunaga wrote:http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dc/2008/06/supreme_court_gun_ban_ruling_p.html?hpid=topnews
... Should be interesting to see the fallout if this thing gets a favorable ruling.
... How about another "Million-Man March", with guns.
... (scratch that. bad idea)
...
Army of GOD wrote:This thread is now about my large penis
DaGip wrote:Nobunaga wrote:http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dc/2008/06/supreme_court_gun_ban_ruling_p.html?hpid=topnews
... Should be interesting to see the fallout if this thing gets a favorable ruling.
... How about another "Million-Man March", with guns.
... (scratch that. bad idea)
...
DID YOU MENTION THE DATE JUNE 26, 2008?
Juan_Bottom wrote:cmckinney wrote:From what I've heard, I think that the Supreme Court is gonna rule against banning handguns. I can understand banning assault rifles and the like, but if you ban handguns, you've completely destroyed the second amendment.
Juan, can you explain to me the ruling in favor of the oil companies?
When the Valdiz spilled oil in Alaska, the resulting lawsuit gave Billions to the citizens of Alaska. The supreme court's ruling today awarded them only a few thousand each. Really you would say that the ruling only favored one company... But it closed the door for any future lawsuits...... due to any other oil spills....
Now that enough time has gone by and no one cares.
I don't know much about the case, but it might have just been to the governments of Alaska or the citizens of the affected coastal regions.cmckinney wrote:Juan_Bottom wrote:cmckinney wrote:From what I've heard, I think that the Supreme Court is gonna rule against banning handguns. I can understand banning assault rifles and the like, but if you ban handguns, you've completely destroyed the second amendment.
Juan, can you explain to me the ruling in favor of the oil companies?
When the Valdiz spilled oil in Alaska, the resulting lawsuit gave Billions to the citizens of Alaska. The supreme court's ruling today awarded them only a few thousand each. Really you would say that the ruling only favored one company... But it closed the door for any future lawsuits...... due to any other oil spills....
Now that enough time has gone by and no one cares.
Are you saying that each and every person of Alaska deserve more than a few thousand dollars for an oil spill that happened many years ago?
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
jay_a2j wrote:The DC gun ban was unconstitutional to begin with, but then again, DC has their own constitution that looks nothing like the one the rest of the nation so patriotically upholds.
cmckinney wrote:Are you saying that each and every person of Alaska deserve more than a few thousand dollars for an oil spill that happened many years ago?
Skoffin wrote: So um.. er... I'll be honest, I don't know what the f*ck to do from here. Goddamnit chu.
Fircoal wrote:meh, I'm torn (like usual on some of these politics) It does make a bit of sense how guns are needed for protection, though I'm against killing in full. Being a threat, no, but still the chances of people dying are higher. Also, anyone who thinks everyone should have a gun and should know how to use it deserves to be hit on the head. (Very hard too)
A vote is like a rifle; it's usefulness depends on the character of the user.
Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far.
Juan_Bottom wrote:cmckinney wrote:Are you saying that each and every person of Alaska deserve more than a few thousand dollars for an oil spill that happened many years ago?
Yes I am. They were never paid to begin with! The case was just tied up until now.
While everyone in the nation was upset, the billions were awarded..... but now that it is forgotten,....they take that money away.
If someone dumped a few thousand gallons of oil in my community, I'd demand a hell of a lot more than a few thousand bucks. It's someones home.
Article wrote:In writing the majority opinion, Justice David Souter said the original $US2.5 billion award was out of line with US maritime law, and that damages against Exxon should be limited to the amount of actual harm caused.
PLAYER57832 wrote:I hope we all become liberal drones.
Nobunaga wrote:... Should be interesting to see the fallout if this thing gets a favorable ruling.
PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
apey wrote:yes but if it stood and they kept the ban other states would have followed so it is a great day for us gun owners
Users browsing this forum: No registered users