All eyes on the Supreme Court

[Squatch]

Poll question: All eyes on the Supreme Court

Who is expected to rule on the constitutionality of DC's gun ban today or tomorrow:

Link

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule in the next day or two on whether the District will be able to keep its controversial gun ban.

The gun control case is being watched closely by lawyers on both sides, because it is likely to have a national effect

Before a packed courtroom in March, justices heard arguments in the case that could overturn the city's 1977 handgun ban, which is the strictest in the nation. The city argues that the law is reasonable and that it curbs violent crime that would get worse with legal handguns in homes. Opponents say the law violates the Second Amendment right to defend the home and has had no impact on city violence.

---------
Which way are the going to rule?

[annabanana]

1. The link doesn't give any particulars as to why this particular

ban is NOT an abrogation of the 2nd amendment.. I am not a fan of unregulated firearms.. but I would like to read the arguments.

[Squatch]

2. Here's a good overview

Link

[tom_paine]

7. It is a good overview, however I am skeptical about Wiki in general omitting or falsifying facts.

Let me explain: As Stephen Colbert has humorously shown, changing Wiki is relatively easy, and for the period between the "wrong" change and the correction & removal of the incorrect information (or restoration of the incorrectly omitted information) ther is a period of time in which the Wiki entry on a given topic is misleading or incorrect.

It therefore stands to reason that it is a statistical certainty that at any given time, some percentage of Wiki entries are INCORRECT or misleading. maybe it's the one we are reading at that moment, maybe not. It's impossible to know.

Therefore, I always try to find some other source to answer my questions and only go to Wki as a last resort, and always with a skeptical eye.

Now, we have found out that government agencies have been accessing Wiki (Google the story if you wish confirmation) on topics such as Guantanamo, etc. to propagandize them and slant them in Bushie favor.

Such things have beome common, and the Government Bushies aren't the only ones to do it, I have no doubt.

I have seen it in action myself. I don't have Wiki editing privieges, so I was unable to correct them.

One huge example: the entry on the Original Tom Paine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Paine

I am happy to see it has been corrected, but when I first looked at it, it had been Freeped. Tom Paine was said to have been a CONSERVATIVE.

For the only Founding Father who was fully opposed to slavery IN 1775, for the only Founding Father who was fully in favor of women's suffrage IN 1775, for the man who said in "The Age of Reason" that the most evil institution in human history was Christianty, this would have come as quite a shock.

Yes, it has been corrected, showing that the Wiki system does work, but anyone who read that entry durign it's time of being Freeped would have believed Paine was one of them, and my point is at any given moment there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of Wiki entries that are "wrong". Preobably not just Bushies doing it, either.

Don't get me wrong, the Wii entry you pointed to was very informative, but like someone who knew nothing about Tom Paine while reading the Freeped entry, I have no idea if I was being misinformed or if some key piece of data was omitted.

Which is a long and rounabout way of saying thanks for the link, but we should always be sketpical of Wiki, no matter how good the link.

[Junkdrawer]

3. Which way are they going to rule? Or which way should they rule?

I guess it's one way to get GD to SEEM to favor a pro-gun ruling.

[Squatch]

4. My prediction is that there will be no difference in the answers to those questions

:thumbsup:

[tom_paine]

5. Agreed. For once, Bushie Interests and National Interests coincide

Although, I will admit, even in it's degraded un-supreme and un-court-like state, occasionally some whiffs of the Old American Republic come shining through, like the amazing Habeus Corpus decision. Amazing in that they did the right thing, instead ofthe Bushie Thing, on this very rare occasion.

A decision which I must add, was only by ONE vote, and WILL NOT SURVIVE MCBUSH SITTING ON THE THRONE.

I would therefore call that victory for liberty and the Founding Fathers, brief, transitory, and easily reversible should McBush be placed on the throne in November, which I tend to believe it very likely he will, no matter who we peasants push our disconnected "voting" buttons for.

However, my point is that in this case I do agree with you. The 2nd Amendment is so tied up withthe myths fed to the Bushie base, that the bushies will destroy it last, and will used their usual Plausible Deniability propaganda to ensure that few realize the 2nd Amendment is dead by other means, like most of the rest of them, except the 3rd Amendment, are right at this second.

I also agree that the second amendment is more important now than perhaps it ever has been to Americans, not that it was ever unimportant.

As I said, it's kind of "nice" that Bushie Criminal & Propaganda Interests, which usually run counter to American Interests, are the same on this oh so very rare occasion.

So yes, they will vote the ban unconstitutional, and yes, it is the correct thing to do.

[Broadslidin]

6. Been itchin' to use that big bad hang gun, eh Bunkey......

"traditional Prairie Chapel high moral values"
Quick and Easy American Style street justice.

Just a couple more stiff :nuke: :grr: :nuke: ones.....

Where you been Laura...?

[Squatch]

8. WTF?

[tom_paine]

9. What a nasty oversimplification of a complex issue, and dimwitted ad hominem.

Not much else to say. They worth of my reply shall be in proportion to the worth of your post.

NONE. ZERO.