Page 1 of 17 123411 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 161
  1. #1
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    263
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Tractor
    Mahindra 2216

    Default Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?


  2. #2
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    3,222
    Location
    SE Wa

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    It's the crack in the door. If that stands, next will be all bolt action, then all hand guns, etc...

  3. #3
    Platinum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    852
    Location
    Southwest Ohio
    Tractor
    2005 JD 3520

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    Holy cow!

  4. #4
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,495

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    Maybe a race between California and Mass on the worst gun laws?
    2007 Kubota L3130, LA723 FEL
    Land Pride FDR1672 rear finish mower, Frontier RB1172, Koyker KB60 BH
    Pallet forks, Golf cart canopy bolted to ROPS, 9" & 12" PHD
    2016 Ferris IS700Z 52" Briggs 27hp commercial turf series

  5. #5
    Super Star Member 2LaneCruzer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    10,335
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Tractor
    John Deere LX172

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkF48 View Post
    Won't stand up to a 2nd Amendment challenge.
    Have Wings, Will Travel.

  6. #6
    Elite Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    4,527
    Location
    Fanning Springs, Gilchirst County, North-Central Florida
    Tractor
    Kubota Tractor Loader L3560 HST 37-hp / 5,400 pounds

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    Recently the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review state court Second Amendment decisions, permitting state court decisions to stand.

    Kind of like State's Rights.
    Last edited by jeff9366; 07-20-2016 at 07:02 PM.

  7. #7
    Silver Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    186
    Location
    South Texas
    Tractor
    Kubota B 2920 upgrading to a B2650 with cab

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    and another reason I live in Texas

  8. #8
    Platinum Member Zerk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    679
    Location
    Wisconsin/UP
    Tractor
    New Holland 2120

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    Quote Originally Posted by hawkeye08 View Post
    Maybe a race between California and Mass on the worst gun laws?
    CA is worse, it bans all semi auto center fire rifles with detachable magazines. That would include 30-06s.

  9. #9
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    1,122
    Location
    Nevada City, CA
    Tractor
    Mahindra 1538TLB

    Default Re: Any Thoughts on This and Implications? Other States Could Follow?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeff9366 View Post
    Recently the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review state court Second Amendment cases, permitting state decisions to stand.
    They are all illegal and unconstitutional, PERIOD. Even the federal laws outlawing automatic weapons are unconstitutional.

    Why is it that no one seems to be able to understand what the second amendment says or can fathom it's true purpose?
    It is very clearly worded and it's meaning and intend are abundantly clear to anyone with half a brain. What the second says is that the right to keep and bear arms, any arms, is guaranteed.
    It's purpose it so that the people can protect themselves against a government run amuck. It has nothing to do with home invaders, wild natives, rapist, robbers, snakes, bears, mountain lions or any other critter or person seeking to do you harm. It has to do with your own government seeking to do you harm.

    A militia has nothing to do with any government controlled type of army at any level of government. The minutemen were a militia. The framers clearly knew who the minutemen were and it was the same the phrase well regulated militia refers to in the second amendment. For those who don't know, the minutemen was an army of insurrection that was in open rebellion against the government then in power which in the minds of the minutemen had run completely amok and become tyrannical.

    When the British marched on Concord it was to cease (illegally horded) cannon, shot and power which were equivalent to the weapons of mass destruction of the day. The framers intended the second amendment to prevent something like Lexington and Concord from happening in this country again. It's extended purpose is to ensure that the government fears and respects the people so the people need never fear their own government.

    No judge, not even the supreme court can suspend the constitution or any part of it. No state or local government can tamper with or pose restraints on the constitution. No member of the administration including the President of the United States has the power to tamper with the constitution or any of its provisions. The ONE and ONLY LEGAL way to amend, mess or tamper with the 2nd amendment such as infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms in any form is though the constitutional amendment process as described in Article 5 of the constitution itself. To my knowledge the 2nd has never been amended nor has anyone had the stones to attempt to amend it. Although they do attempt to slime around it all the time like the cowards they are. They may pass laws but those laws are unconstitutional therefore illegal as the constitution is the SUPREME law of the land. Each and every person who passes these laws has also sworn an oath to uphold the constitution as the supreme law of the land. According to the constitution they have to in order to hold any office at all. Every legislator, every member of the administration and every member of the judicial branch does. Every lawyer, soldier and sailor also does. The constitution is the ultimate trump card that trumps all other trumps. No other law, rule or regulation is valid against it.

    We are either a nation of laws or we are not. Law can not be applied to some and not to all equally. This is exactly what the constitution is all about and has always been all about.

    There is a word for those in power who attempt to hold themselves above the law and hold the rest in contempt and that word is TYRANT.

    The intent and purpose of the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) was to keep tyrants at bay by providing the people the tools they need to maintain this nation as a one where freedom and liberty reign supreme and for all times. It would be fair to consider anyone who attempts to waltz around any part of the Bill of Rights as potential tyrant with ill intent.

  10. #10
    Gold Member Woody65's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    294
    Location
    East Northport and Oneonta NY
    Tractor
    John Deere 4300 HST 4wd

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dickfoster View Post
    They are all illegal and unconstitutional, PERIOD. Even the federal laws outlawing automatic weapons are unconstitutional. Why is it that no one seems to be able to understand what the second amendment says or can fathom it's true purpose? It is very clearly worded and it's meaning and intend are abundantly clear to anyone with half a brain. What the second says is that the right to keep and bear arms, any arms, is guaranteed. It's purpose it so that the people can protect themselves against a government run amuck. It has nothing to do with home invaders, wild natives, rapist, robbers, snakes, bears, mountain lions or any other critter or person seeking to do you harm. It has to do with your own government seeking to do you harm. A militia has nothing to do with any government controlled type of army at any level of government. The minutemen were a militia. The framers clearly knew who the minutemen were and it was the same the phrase well regulated militia refers to in the second amendment. For those who don't know, the minutemen was an army of insurrection that was in open rebellion against the government then in power which in the minds of the minutemen had run completely amok and become tyrannical. When the British marched on Concord it was to cease (illegally horded) cannon, shot and power which were equivalent to the weapons of mass destruction of the day. The framers intended the second amendment to prevent something like Lexington and Concord from happening in this country again. It's extended purpose is to ensure that the government fears and respects the people so the people need never fear their own government. No judge, not even the supreme court can suspend the constitution or any part of it. No state or local government can tamper with or pose restraints on the constitution. No member of the administration including the President of the United States has the power to tamper with the constitution or any of its provisions. The ONE and ONLY LEGAL way to amend, mess or tamper with the 2nd amendment such as infringe on the people's right to keep and bear arms in any form is though the constitutional amendment process as described in Article 5 of the constitution itself. To my knowledge the 2nd has never been amended nor has anyone had the stones to attempt to amend it. Although they do attempt to slime around it all the time like the cowards they are. We are either a nation of laws or we are not. Law can not be applied to some and not to all equally. This is exactly what the constitution is all about and has always been all about. There is a word for those in power who attempt to hold themselves above the law and hold the rest in contempt and that word is TYRANT. The intent and purpose of the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) was to keep tyrants at bay by providing the people the tools they need to maintain this nation as a one where freedom and liberty reign supreme and for all times.
    Very well stated Sir.
    Trying to stay out of trouble but the day ain't over
    JD 4300 HST 4wd, JD 430 FEL, NH 930B finish mower, New Holland 906 PHD,
    10,000# GVW 16' trailer, Bush hog SQ600, 6' landscape rake, 6' back blade,
    48" ETA grapple, Bobcat 331 excavator w/thumb


Page 1 of 17 123411 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Tax implications for starting an orchard
    By SilverbackMP in forum Related Topics
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-21-2009, 11:25 PM
  2. Mahindra acquires Jinma, Implications ?
    By corey in forum Chinese Tractors
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-08-2008, 04:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
© 2016 TractorByNet.com. TractorByNet is a registered trademark of IMC Digital Universe, Inc. Other trademarks on this page are the property of their respective owners.