Impartial_Observer

@Bobrefas a person in the know, what is your opinion on the basis for the findings in Roe? Was it solid legal principle or was it flawed? 
FWIW, I don’t think this opens the door to contraception, same sex marriage, etc. Over the years the public pretty much accepts these things. Abortion however has never gained the public support like these other issues. I would venture to guess that at the time of Roe, a majority of Americans would have been against Roe. I would also venture a guess if we could poll the nation right slightly less than a majority are in favor of Roe’s over turning. The bottom line is, in the last 50 years the Public’s opinion hasn’t changed. About half of the nation is pro abortion and about half the nation is anti abortion. And this will continue to be a divisive social wedge issue until that public opinion changes. What the court has done is most like created a situation where we will have a patchwork of ever changing (everything the party in charge changes) abortion laws. This in my opinion could lead to abortion exhaustion where people are just sick of listening to it and time it out. Much like our recent mask/vax nonsense. 

7 hours ago, Bobref said:

It takes 4 justices to grant certiorari and those votes are not made public, although very occasionally a Justice will write a dissent after a vote. But even in the rare cases where that happens, it’s usually a dissent from the denial of cert, not a grant.

I have a bit of an issue with those claiming that the court succumbed to political pressure or it has become politicized. Politics plays a role in everything. For instance, the court has not taken a 2A case in 10 years. The conventional thinking is the conservative justices would never grant Cert for fear of Roberts. Then suddenly when Robert’s vote becomes moot, suddenly they’re taking a crucial 2A case. 
As I have said before, in politics there’s nothing new under the sun. I have been thrilled with SCOTUS findings and I have been quite dismayed at SCOTUS rulings. It’s not like I have any control over it. And the sun will still come up tomorrow. I stayed in downtown Bloomington Friday night and they were all fired up around the courthouse, which is awesome, but I’m not really sure what leading chants with a bullhorn at the closed courthouse in Bloomington is going to help your cause. You better get in the phone with your local IGA representatives,  before the Idiot R leadership in the state really screws the pooch for all Hoosiers. 

7 hours ago, Bobref said:

At least the Catholic church’s stance is consistent and based on doctrine, regardless whether you believe it right or wrong. I firmly believe that many of those cheering this decision do so out of their desire to misogynistically legislate morality. It’s a powerful blow in favor of the double standard. All I’ll say at this point is “Beware the Law of Unintended Consequences.” They took away something that was viewed as a constitutional right for almost 50 years. They can take away others just as easily.

Just out of curiosity do we know which justices voted for cert in this case?

On 6/24/2022 at 2:40 PM, Bobref said:

Indiana’s Republican supermajority General Assembly plans to address the state’s abortion laws during a July 6 special session. Get ready for the sh*tshow to end all sh*tshows.

Until the mid terms and the national R’s say hold my beer……and we end up with Mayor Pete or some such being prez in 24. 

I have to ask……

What does a free FB group cost to purchase?

It should be noted that one of the major proponents of this case was the New York Public Defenders. Their contention was their case load is crammed with an inordinate amount of weapons charges against otherwise non-criminal actors. They maintained that prosecution of such cases is in large part against minorities. 
Big win for the 2A, I believe there are 7 or 8 may issue states that this will affect. There were already several lawsuits pending in various courts pending this ruling. 
Indiana itself used to be a may issue state. The state SC overturned it in the early 70’s. 

18 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

Well Trump nearly died; you and several of "those people" got sick; I got paid for two jobs during the lockdown; my teaching positions upgraded since then; and my choice of trucking jobs got better, so yeah the pandemic was pretty good for me. 

Sorry not sorry you didn't benefit and got sick; Deus Vult. 

So happy when people nearly died or died and apparently have determined at some point I was sick. About what I would expect from someone like you. 

SCOTUS has struck down New York’s “may issue” licensing scheme. A big win for the citizens of the handful of remaining states that still have may issue licensing scheme. 
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

15 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

I bet you never stayed indoors; but the pandemic was a blessing for me, so I guess I should thank you for in part for my good times. 

I have no doubt a person such as yourself would see the pandemic as a blessing. 

Little known fact TA had a soft spot for Softball players, my daughter was just starting her career when she met TA. Whenever I talked to him after he met her he always asked me how she was doing and how her career was going. I often thought of the big guy watching her play throughout her career. TA had a heart of gold and he did what he did for all the right reasons. 

1 hour ago, DK_Barons said:

30 December 2004

Geez what was Jimmie in this pic, about 12?

36 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

And mining and burning the coal will kill the planet in the process. 

Only two weeks to flatten the curve. 

Is it just me or is this conversation like listening to an 8-track tape that’s stuck on track 1. 

8 minutes ago, swordfish said:

Drugs, rehab, infidelity must run in the Biden family.......Although SF doesn't remember hearing much about this (other) kid and her diary left behind at a half-way house ahead of the 2020 election......

• 'I remember having sex with friends @ a young age; showers w/ my dad (probably not appropriate),' she wrote in a January 2019 entry 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10896941/Florida-woman-Ashley-Bidens-diary-investigation-selling-it.html

 

 

 

2 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

 

 

If you paid a fortune at the pump it’s because the Biden Administration has lousy:

Energy policy

Foreign policy

Monetary policy 

Economic policy

It’s like watching Bullwinkle pull a rabbit out of his hat  

As I see it, the D’s have a HUGE problem in the near term, if poor Terry has to choose between new tires for the wheel chair and fireworks…..oh lawt!

17 hours ago, Bobref said:

Well, it’s a nice opportunity to throw some federal funds in the direction of local PDs, and for some cops to make some easy overtime.

I suppose you’re against “The War On Drugs,” too, just like @Muda69? 🤣😂

 

How could it be any worse? Cheap drugs from central/South American cartels, laced/cut with god knows what? And we the taxpayers are on the hook for the bill, whether it’s Narcan, hospital bills, burial, or incarceration. 

10 minutes ago, Irishman said:

I know a lot of people here don't like Trudeau or Obrador,  but I am also pretty sure neither of them are invading us anytime soon. 🤣

But what if we want to invade them?

21 minutes ago, Bobref said:

I really don’t think you want to venture down the 4th Amendment rabbit hole.

 Not really but it is demonstrative of the point. Rehnquist himself said it was a breach of the 4th Amendment, and drunk driving is still a thing. We have neither liberty nor safety, but we can all feel better because we did “something”. 

13 hours ago, Bobref said:

It goes back a lot further, and is a lot more fundamental, than the Constitution. It’s part of the social contract that underlies civilized society. In return for surrendering certain rights, the governed have a right to expect the government to provide protection.

So sorta like we concede our collective 4th Amendment rights so we can have DUI Checkpoints so we can rid the nation’s roads of drunk drivers. I guess it was a small price to pay to no longer have drunk drivers on the road…..

37 minutes ago, Bobref said:

 

As someone who has never owned a firearm, and probably never will, this is a much more compelling argument against gun control than the usual “we have to protect ourselves from the government oppressors.” 

C’mon man! You’re a SCOTUS guy, police have no constitutional mandate to protect you. 

1) No ones coming to help you. 
2) You are responsible for everything. 

On 5/28/2022 at 10:09 AM, DanteEstonia said:

I know more than you;

Sure you do Scooter. 

12 hours ago, DanteEstonia said:

Access is tied to money. 

When I said if you know, you know, you clearly don’t, that’s when most people with a clue keep their mouth shut. 

1 hour ago, Bobref said:

The debate around gun violence is another one I find fascinating, in no small part because the issue has become so weaponized in the political arena. But it also seems to me that the debate is largely irreconcilable because there are actually two separate issues being treated as one. You can’t expect the same solution to work for two separate “problems.”

The first problem can be described as the “violent crime” problem. Some might phrase the problem as too many guns, involving too much firepower, being too available, with the result being a lot of people getting shot.

The second problem is the “active shooter” problem: Firearms winding up in the hands of a mentally unbalanced person, who subsequently is involved in a mass shooting.

These are two distinct problems which call for distinctly different solutions. The first problem is typically addressed through legislative efforts to impose restrictions on certain types of weaponry and the transferability of weapons, as well as tracking of weapons ownership through registration and licensing requirements. Historically, these are the cases that have tested the boundaries of the Second Amendment. The “pro-gun” folks routinely oppose any expansion of government in this area. And you can see why it is in their interests to do so.

The second problem is addressed wholly differently, through the analysis of information about an individual, often in the form of background checks, criminal history, and other information, in an effort to identify the people we don’t want to have access to firearms. Certainly, there can be legitimate concerns about the nature and extent of the information necessary, the manner in which it is acquired, how it is used, etc. But the basic premise is one on which we should all be able to agree: it is not in the best interests of society to arm crazy people. Yet, the “pro-gun” people continue, for the most part, to oppose any extensions of this information-gathering process, in the misguided belief that it represents the same sort of threat to their “rights” as gun owners as the solutions used to address problem #1. That’s wrong, and the only argument mustered in favor of that misguided stance is the dreaded “slippery slope” argument. Can we just stop with no using that illogical and intellectually lazy rationale to justify otherwise speculative conclusions? https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope

I think you are oversimplifying Red Flag Laws. I would characterize myself as pro-2A, and while I don’t speak for anyone but myself, I think most rational folks like myself don’t necessarily have an issue with Red Flag Laws, in fact would characterize myself as pro RFL. Don’t misunderstand opposition in implementation with opposition to the methods which are employed. 
 

For me, there has to be a hard time limit where the accused, with counsel, may confront the accusations. 
 

Indiana has a decent law, that continues to be tweaked. But it still didn’t stop the Fed/Ex shooter, because the Marion County Prosecutor failed to do his due diligence. But sure, what we clearly need are more laws. 

55 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

You're the one complaining about getting someone psychological help. Psychological help costs money.

It would just be easier/cheaper to pull high-capacity mags and ar-15s off of store shelves. 

My comment about accessing mental health had nothing to do with insurance or payment.  
 

You’ll be happy to know I just brought home my latest acquisition, a Magnesium AR upper and lower finished in sniper gray. But the best part is the serial number is my birth year.