SCOTUS Does It Again

At the daily point of contact, they really do. Not evenly, and not over all. But we are being reminded week in week out how real a lone patrolman’s power is; and that’s before we get the effects of the blue line of omerta.

The context is SCOTUS. The previous rulings are being ignored.

And I think that is silly… if you think someone who is released from prison is still violent then keep them in prison.

They received a sentence that, upon completion, they have paid their debt to society. Punishing further when they get released from Prison defeats the purpose of a sentencing someone with less than “life without parole”


In the grey?

Now that’s funny…


Wow…tips hat.

That’s why I had real problem with non violent drug offenders people being incarcerated with violent one.

1 Like

We’re not discussing people who go to prison in many cases. The legal sentence is a lifetime ban on weapons possession.

1 Like

There are no repercussions for SCOTUS justices. Ever.

They didn’t take the case because it was rightly decided in the first place.


It’s the same as sex offenders, they have a lifetime of reporting their whereabouts.

Don’t do the crime, if you can’t do the time.


Selling tapes is the same as sex offenders.

Of course not.

But Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.

Ignorance of the laws of the state doesn’t wash with me.

Before committing a crime, one should know the consequences of their action if caught and convicted.


In this case the inability to purchase a gun legally.

If you don’t like the law, change it instead of wasting the courts time to what end.


All laws are not good.

That’s why there is a mechanism to change the ones that are bad and not in a states best interest.


It is in the state’s best interest to disarm the citizenry. The Bill of Rights is all against the state’s best interests. That’s the point of it.

1 Like

And there is the crux of the argument.

Keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies v second amendment rights.

Each state has to determine what is best for its populace.


Do you want felons to have guns in prison?

I mean there is a line, right regarding the 2A.

Each state determines where that line is drawn.


And that is why the Bill of Rights was necessary.

1 Like

Are they hearing any cases? It seems like every other day I read about the SCOTUS refusing to hear another case.

1 Like

Yeah - what is the mechanism for deciding if they take up a case? Do they hav to disagree with prior decisions, or do they have to think the arguments are somehow unsettled in case law?

Is not taking up a case an affirmation of the lower court’s ruling? Or does it indicate something else?