5 ms·

The needle has been moved massively in NYC, California, Hawaii, all places where you need a permit just to exercise a right. The supreme court hasn't struck do

The needle has been moved massively in NYC, California, Hawaii, all places where you need a permit just to exercise a right. The supreme court hasn't struck down the need for a permit to exercise a right (just to buy pistol in NYC or Hawaii). Nowhere in the country can you just drill the third hole in an AR and go at it without asking for permission. Nowhere in the country can someone with a federal felony [except some white collar trading crimes] exercise their second amendment right, even if all tehy did was illegally import a lobster. Nowhere in the country can you saw a 16 inch barrel down one inch without asking daddy for permission. Several states now require universal background check just to exercise a right (own a firearm). None of this has been strucken by supreme court. 2A is dead, now we just have a legacy of fairly liberal gun laws in certain circumstances and states.

adgjlsfhk1 5y ago
wait until you learn that you need permits to protest and drive.
- notch656a 5y ago
  Name a single place in US where you need a permit to buy a car or drive it on private property (which by the way, isn't an explicit right named in constitution as keeping and bearing arms is). Permit for a protest is also utter horseshit on par with restrictions on 2A.
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    >> wait until you learn that you need permits to protest and drive. > Name a single place in US where you need a permit to buy a car or drive it on private property Even if you don't need a permit to back your car down your driveway (after someone with a permit has brought it to your home), you still need one to drive it anywhere anyone would actually want to go. So you effectively need a permit to drive.
    - dahfizz 5y ago
      You've entirely missed the point. You need a permit to drive _on public roads_. You don't need a permit to buy a car and only drive it on private property. Plenty of people have project cars that they tow to a race track / drag strip and don't need to register or license anything. This is obviously NOT analogous to the 2A, where you need licenses and registrations just to buy a gun. In an analogous situation to cars, you would not need a license to buy a gun and shoot it at a firing range. So the low effort quip "lol what about drivers licenses" that adgjlsfhk1 and many others make is not reasonable.
      - tablespoon 5y ago
        > You've entirely missed the point. You need a permit to drive _on public roads_. No, I haven't. Driving on public roads is what most people mean by "drive."
        dahfizz 5y ago
        And shooting on private property is what most people use their guns for. So you agree that the licensing situation for driving and shooting is different.
        tablespoon 5y ago
        > And shooting on private property is what most people use their guns for. So you agree that the licensing situation for driving and shooting is different. I agree they are not precisely the same thing in all respects. However practically, the situations don't seem very different. >>> So the low effort quip "lol what about drivers licenses" that adgjlsfhk1 and many others make is not reasonable. It kind of is reasonable, given this sub-thread started with some pretty unreasonable or at least weird positions (e.g. 2A is "dead" apparently b/c everyone can't get a full-auto without a permit).
        notch656a 5y ago
        2A is dead, 3d printing is an insurance policy. Full-auto is one of many infringements, but probably not the worst. Arguably a couple of the worst are permits just to buy a firearm (NYC), impossible to acquire permit to carry (Hawaii), and denial of civil rights to those who have finished the entirety of their sentences and probations.
  - avrionov 5y ago
    I don't think that a dealership in California will allow you to leave the lot without an insurance. You can't test drive it without a driving license too.
    - notch656a 5y ago
      If you finance a vehicle that is probably the case, as the financier/lien holder will impose these requirements when you sign to buy the car. If you own it outright (paid in full) then how would they stop you? Of course you shouldn't drive it on public road without insurance, but no one should care if you call a tow truck to take it to your private property. A dealership tried to do this to me when I bought a truck with cash, and I told them [politely] to get fucked (I had insurance but no proof on me as I bought it over phone). Then they finally admitted since I owned the truck outright they wouldn't stop me. > You can't test drive it without a driving license too. When you're test driving you haven't bought the car. The dealership can refuse to let you drive their car for pretty much any non-protected reason.
- otterley 5y ago
  1. Driving is not a Constitutional right, unlike the right to keep and bear arms. 2. While the First Amendment does protect speech, the Supreme Court has held that time/place/manner restrictions on speech can be created by the Government as long as there is a rational basis for them. Compare against content-based restrictions, which will be strictly scrutinized by the courts. Legal analysis is complicated and actions rarely fall into black-or-white categories. Even Second Amendment law has a large number of contours.
  - notch656a 5y ago
    The supreme court has also held that growing crops on your own private land to feed to your own animals is "interstate commerce." They're a laughable institution who's opinion should be promptly shit-canned.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]

adgjlsfhk1 5y ago

wait until you learn that you need permits to protest and drive.

notch656a 5y ago
Name a single place in US where you need a permit to buy a car or drive it on private property (which by the way, isn't an explicit right named in constitution as keeping and bearing arms is). Permit for a protest is also utter horseshit on par with restrictions on 2A.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  >> wait until you learn that you need permits to protest and drive. > Name a single place in US where you need a permit to buy a car or drive it on private property Even if you don't need a permit to back your car down your driveway (after someone with a permit has brought it to your home), you still need one to drive it anywhere anyone would actually want to go. So you effectively need a permit to drive.
  - dahfizz 5y ago
    You've entirely missed the point. You need a permit to drive _on public roads_. You don't need a permit to buy a car and only drive it on private property. Plenty of people have project cars that they tow to a race track / drag strip and don't need to register or license anything. This is obviously NOT analogous to the 2A, where you need licenses and registrations just to buy a gun. In an analogous situation to cars, you would not need a license to buy a gun and shoot it at a firing range. So the low effort quip "lol what about drivers licenses" that adgjlsfhk1 and many others make is not reasonable.
    - tablespoon 5y ago
      > You've entirely missed the point. You need a permit to drive _on public roads_. No, I haven't. Driving on public roads is what most people mean by "drive."
      - dahfizz 5y ago
        And shooting on private property is what most people use their guns for. So you agree that the licensing situation for driving and shooting is different.
        tablespoon 5y ago
        > And shooting on private property is what most people use their guns for. So you agree that the licensing situation for driving and shooting is different. I agree they are not precisely the same thing in all respects. However practically, the situations don't seem very different. >>> So the low effort quip "lol what about drivers licenses" that adgjlsfhk1 and many others make is not reasonable. It kind of is reasonable, given this sub-thread started with some pretty unreasonable or at least weird positions (e.g. 2A is "dead" apparently b/c everyone can't get a full-auto without a permit).
        notch656a 5y ago
        2A is dead, 3d printing is an insurance policy. Full-auto is one of many infringements, but probably not the worst. Arguably a couple of the worst are permits just to buy a firearm (NYC), impossible to acquire permit to carry (Hawaii), and denial of civil rights to those who have finished the entirety of their sentences and probations.
- avrionov 5y ago
  I don't think that a dealership in California will allow you to leave the lot without an insurance. You can't test drive it without a driving license too.
  - notch656a 5y ago
    If you finance a vehicle that is probably the case, as the financier/lien holder will impose these requirements when you sign to buy the car. If you own it outright (paid in full) then how would they stop you? Of course you shouldn't drive it on public road without insurance, but no one should care if you call a tow truck to take it to your private property. A dealership tried to do this to me when I bought a truck with cash, and I told them [politely] to get fucked (I had insurance but no proof on me as I bought it over phone). Then they finally admitted since I owned the truck outright they wouldn't stop me. > You can't test drive it without a driving license too. When you're test driving you haven't bought the car. The dealership can refuse to let you drive their car for pretty much any non-protected reason.
otterley 5y ago
1. Driving is not a Constitutional right, unlike the right to keep and bear arms. 2. While the First Amendment does protect speech, the Supreme Court has held that time/place/manner restrictions on speech can be created by the Government as long as there is a rational basis for them. Compare against content-based restrictions, which will be strictly scrutinized by the courts. Legal analysis is complicated and actions rarely fall into black-or-white categories. Even Second Amendment law has a large number of contours.
- notch656a 5y ago
  The supreme court has also held that growing crops on your own private land to feed to your own animals is "interstate commerce." They're a laughable institution who's opinion should be promptly shit-canned.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]