Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Discussions > Off-Topic Discussion

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:17 PM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by DieselAddict View Post
I don't see anything here that will take guns away from people who comply with the law. Besides, having a car is more important than having a gun, and cars have to be registered so why not register guns too. Please save the conspiracy theories for your kids.
Uh, that's the point, "complying with the law." What part of "shall not be infringed" eludes you?

Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:19 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
"Shall not be infringed" doesn't mean there cannot be any restrictions or regulations. Ask the Supreme Court.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:25 PM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by DieselAddict View Post
"Shall not be infringed" doesn't mean there cannot be any restrictions or regulations. Ask the Supreme Court.
That's the current interpretation and is why a law preventing ownership unless terms were adhered to was recently overturned by the SC. The key is defining what unreasonably burdensome. To me, it is any government intervention whatsoever. Somewhere between my view and Chuck Schumers is probably what will prevail.

An argument which I have more sympathy for is based on states' rights. I don't think it is necessary or especially useful to have uniform laws across all states. Why should Wyoming's laws apply to New York? Or vice-versa. So if California (say) wants to have some highly restrictive laws, I have sympathy for that argument.

But I don't have sympathy for the federalization of ownership laws as the variation in attitudes across states is tremendous. Some things are better left to state or local legislation or ordinance.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:29 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
I can go with that, but personally I don't think this proposed federal law is too restrictive. I think it's quite reasonable.

So if it were up to you, you wouldn't even have background checks for gun purchasers? After all background checks are a form of government intervention.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:30 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blue Point, NY
Posts: 25,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
An argument which I have more sympathy for is based on states' rights. I don't think it is necessary or especially useful to have uniform laws across all states. Why should Wyoming's laws apply to New York? Or vice-versa. So if California (say) wants to have some highly restrictive laws, I have sympathy for that argument.
This state..........specifically this county..........makes it effectively impossible to have a concealed handgun in a public place. The only exception being a target shooter who is taking it to or from the range.

The second amendment can obviously be stretched to the limit without apparent recourse.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:34 PM
Hatterasguy's Avatar
Zero
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Milford, CT
Posts: 19,318
Emails sent, I will call tomarrow. Several of my friends will be doing that as well.
__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:36 PM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Carlton View Post
This state..........specifically this county..........makes it effectively impossible to have a concealed handgun in a public place. The only exception being a target shooter who is taking it to or from the range.

The second amendment can obviously be stretched to the limit without apparent recourse.
That's the ***** of local laws. Your recourse is to change the local law or move or break the law. Having lived in that kind of community, I chose to break the law.

B
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:37 PM
Hatterasguy's Avatar
Zero
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Milford, CT
Posts: 19,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
That's the current interpretation and is why a law preventing ownership unless terms were adhered to was recently overturned by the SC. The key is defining what unreasonably burdensome. To me, it is any government intervention whatsoever. Somewhere between my view and Chuck Schumers is probably what will prevail.

An argument which I have more sympathy for is based on states' rights. I don't think it is necessary or especially useful to have uniform laws across all states. Why should Wyoming's laws apply to New York? Or vice-versa. So if California (say) wants to have some highly restrictive laws, I have sympathy for that argument.

But I don't have sympathy for the federalization of ownership laws as the variation in attitudes across states is tremendous. Some things are better left to state or local legislation or ordinance.
I simply feel the federal government is to powerfull so I will oppose anything that extends its power.

I agree it should be a state rights issue.
__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:37 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Reno/Sparks, NV
Posts: 3,063
I think we also need some emails in support of this, so this crazy vocal minority doesn't look like the majority.
__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:39 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Blue Point, NY
Posts: 25,396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
That's the ***** of local laws. Your recourse is to change the local law or move or break the law. Having lived in that kind of community, I chose to break the law.

B
From my limited knowledge of other owners, they believe that they can "bend" that no full carry law by claiming that they were on the way to the range...........if ever stopped.

Did you (or do you currently) go with a full carry.........at all times? It's got to be a bit of a burden.........
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:52 PM
Botnst's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: There castle.
Posts: 44,601
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Carlton View Post
From my limited knowledge of other owners, they believe that they can "bend" that no full carry law by claiming that they were on the way to the range...........if ever stopped.

Did you (or do you currently) go with a full carry.........at all times? It's got to be a bit of a burden.........
Rarely. Though recently I had enough weapons in my E300D's voluminous trunk that I could have supported Jack Bower. A .270, three 12 ga shotguns (2 semi-autos and a pump), a 20 ga (double), a .410 (double), four .22 rifles, and a .38, a .357, and a couple of .22 pistols. Several boxes of ammo for each. Bricks of .22 ammo. Had a blast at the range. Did the traps, the pistol range and the rifle range. The 3 of us were sore-shouldered.

I don't carry anymore (well, rarely) because I no longer do a lot of road traveling to strange towns for months on end like I did when I doodlebugged. But if I traveled a lot or carried a lot of valuables, I'd carry, you bet.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-11-2009, 08:56 PM
Matt SD300's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 276
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hatterasguy View Post
MF havn't even been in power for a month! I'm calling my rep.
X2......BC would ban "ME" for your post.........
__________________
Matt (SD,CA)

1984 300SD.. White/Chrome Bunts..Green

1997 2500 Dodge Ram 5.9 Cummins 12 Valve 36 PSI of Boost = 400+hp & 800+tQ .. ..Greenspeed

2004 Dodge Ram 2500 4x4 Quad Cab Cummins 5.9 H.O "596hp/1225tq" 6 spd. Man. Leather Heated seats/Loaded..Flame Red....GREENSPEED

Global warming...Doing my part, Smokin da hippies..

Fight the good fight!......
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-11-2009, 09:02 PM
Jorn's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: TheFlyingDutchManInHollywood
Posts: 6,865
This notion that a "civilian" can fight the "Big Evil Federal Government" is so touching...I love those romantic Americans...so cute
__________________
1979 Black on Black, 300CD (sold), 1990 Black 300SE, Silver 1989 Volvo 780, 1988 300CE (vanished by the hands of a girlfriend), 1992 300CE (Rescue).
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-11-2009, 09:03 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,263
At least there is no microstamping or other such things in there.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-11-2009, 09:03 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Phoenix Arizona. Ex Durban R.S.A.
Posts: 6,104
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
Uh, that's the point, "complying with the law." What part of "shall not be infringed" eludes you?
I was about to reply in almost exactly the same vein. I think it's disgusting that American citizens could be in a positition where they have to jump thru hoops to satisfy their lords and masters as to their passivity before they'll be, provisionally, treated as responsible adults. When I lived in South Africa, where I carried a licensed pistol everywhere I went, I used to think the NRA was a somewhat extreme organization and that if I ever were lucky enough to make it to the US I would probably not have much time for them.

However I am now a member and becoming even more extreme in my views as time goes by as the essence of the US is continuously eroded by this type of nauseating nanny statism.

- Peter.

__________________
2021 Chevrolet Spark
Formerly...
2000 GMC Sonoma
1981 240D 4spd stick. 347000 miles. Deceased Feb 14 2021
2002 Kia Rio. Worst crap on four wheels
1981 240D 4spd stick. 389000 miles.
1984 123 200
1979 116 280S
1972 Cadillac Sedan DeVille
1971 108 280S
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:36 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2024 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page