|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 registered members (Skullworks, Shmoe, CrappieMan, SC53, kpswihart, Dean, wareagle22, bamamed1, mathews prostaff, sidehitter, cartervj, bug54, Chaser357, Joe4majors, turfarmer, BamaBoHunter, tombo51, johnv, Hoytdad10, DuckDown11, Todd1700, Parker243, CatfishJunkie, Pwyse, Jwoods32, Fedex 1, graydw1, shootnmiss, CCC, !shiloh!, filespinner, BD, russellb, jaredhunts, Mbrock, DonH, Chiller, curt99rsv, Shotts, fur_n_feathers, StateLine, Herdbull, Rolloverdave, Ron A., Luxfisher, rickyh_2, COOTER, Ruger7mag, HOWTON21, bama_tacoma, BCLC, headshot1, Tree Dweller, 000buck, crenshawco, DoeMaster, IMISSALDEER, GoldenEagle, Hoof2table, kyles, bward85, Bamajoz, HollerHunter, Narrow Gap, sw1002, Turberville, Scott4Hunting, Reaper, 7 invisible),
445
guests, and 0
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Amendment 3
#1129064
10/29/14 05:36 AM
10/29/14 05:36 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002 Millbrook, AL
leroyb
OP
8 point
|
OP
8 point
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002
Millbrook, AL
|
I don't want to hijack the Amendment 5 thread so lets here your thoughts about Amendment 3
Amendment 3 provides that every citizen has the fundamental right under the State Constitution to bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the State. Amendment 3 also provides that this right would be entitled to the highest protection of the law. Amendment 3 also protects a citizen from being compelled by any treaties or laws of another country to take an action which would prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with his or her right to bear arms if that treaty or law would violate the United States Constitution. If Amendment 3 IS PASSED, the right to bear arms will be elevated under the State Constitution to a fundamental right and given the highest possible protection. This right will also be provided with additional protection from potential interference by international treaty or foreign law. If Amendment 3 IS DEFEATED, the right to bear arms in Alabama will still exist in the State Constitution, but it will not be declared a fundamental right and may not be subject to the highest possible protection. The right to bear arms will also not be protected from potential interference by international laws and treaties.
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129085
10/29/14 05:54 AM
10/29/14 05:54 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
I'm concerned about the way it is worded. Strictly read, it says that any infringement on the right to bear arms will be subject to strict judicial scrutiny. I understand that is a legal term with specific implications. And in the current environment that may be fine......but what happens should the court go liberal at some point in the future? Would this be the thing that allows the court to be used to infringe upon our right?
I like "shall not be infringed" better.
I still don't know what to do with this one
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129100
10/29/14 05:58 AM
10/29/14 05:58 AM
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,894 Cullman
CKyleC
(Can't Keep It Up...)
|
(Can't Keep It Up...)
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 5,894
Cullman
|
I'm voting no on 3 and 5. As I understand it, right now its a right, period, no ifs ands or buts. This changes it to subject to strictest scrutiny, whatever the hell that is.
If I'm wrong, enlighten me.
"In Alabama, we prefer to kill small bucks on big properties"-Turkey247
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129105
10/29/14 06:00 AM
10/29/14 06:00 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899 Huntsville AL
Rocket62
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
|
Amendment 3: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide that every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms and that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny; and to provide that no international treaty or law shall prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with a citizen's fundamental right to bear arms. (Proposed by Act 2013-267) That appears to be adding provisions that would prevent the U.N. from monkeying around with our rights at the state level ... aint that a good thing?
I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129111
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,033 Port St Joe, FL
Moose24
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,033
Port St Joe, FL
|
This is very interesting. I would do some research before you jump on a "Yes" vote. The real kicker that is causing alarm is the wording "....that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny". This wording seems to open the door for rulings affecting our right to bear arms where no such "open door" previously existed. http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/10/proposed_statewide_amendment_3.htmlThis seems like a do-nothing bill that has more of a chance to do harm than good. At this moment I am voting 'NO'.
Last edited by Moose24; 10/29/14 06:05 AM.
The Things You Remember in Life aren't Things at all.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Rocket62]
#1129112
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797 Smith Lake
300Ruger
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,797
Smith Lake
|
Amendment 3: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, to provide that every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms and that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny; and to provide that no international treaty or law shall prohibit, limit, or otherwise interfere with a citizen's fundamental right to bear arms. (Proposed by Act 2013-267) That appears to be adding provisions that would prevent the U.N. from monkeying around with our rights at the state level ... aint that a good thing? I may just not get it. How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened? I agree with the above post - I'm suspicious of the "scrutiny" part.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: johnnyreb]
#1129114
10/29/14 06:04 AM
10/29/14 06:04 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999 Holly Pond, AL
NightHunter
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999
Holly Pond, AL
|
I'm concerned about the way it is worded. Strictly read, it says that any infringement on the right to bear arms will be subject to strict judicial scrutiny. I understand that is a legal term with specific implications. And in the current environment that may be fine......but what happens should the court go liberal at some point in the future? Would this be the thing that allows the court to be used to infringe upon our right?
I like "shall not be infringed" better.
I still don't know what to do with this one Problem is scrutiny can come from the bench and who wants that? We do not need strict scrutiny from a liberal judge trying to make a name for themselves. We have the second amendment and it works just fine.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: 300Ruger]
#1129132
10/29/14 06:21 AM
10/29/14 06:21 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899 Huntsville AL
Rocket62
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
|
How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened? When Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the U.N. there was a lot of flap about Obama using this to get around the 2nd amendment to curtail private gun ownership. I believe the resolution is that this little trick won't work but ... As long as we have such left minded people running our country who is to say that we won't sign an agreement with the U.N. to limit private gun ownership? Anyway, I was just thinking out loud that maybe this amendment was targeting that possibility ...
I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129158
10/29/14 06:39 AM
10/29/14 06:39 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609 Alabama
Rmart30
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609
Alabama
|
Here is a 20 minute podcast with Rep Mike Jones the Pro 2a sponsor of this bill who explains why the bill was introduced and its intent. The host sorta hammers him about adding more amendments etc. He cuts him off for a break but then brings him back to finish the interview.. Host goes a little off topic toward the end but its a good listen. He also goes into what strict scrutiny is and why it was put into it. There are 3 levels of scrutiny in the judicial system.. rational intermediate, and strict with rational being the lowest. Sen Scott Beason also did a interview on this amendment and he was 100% in on it. Beason is about a pro 2a politician as I have met. If there was anything in it that he remotely thought would hurt our 2a rights he would bring it up. http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=1291&c=6311&f=3544613
Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching - even when doing the wrong thing is legal. Aldo Leopold .. (except when it comes to trailer tags)
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Rocket62]
#1129171
10/29/14 06:50 AM
10/29/14 06:50 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,760 Buc-ee’s Beach Express
leroycnbucks
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 24,760
Buc-ee’s Beach Express
|
How does the U.N. have jurisdiction over state or federal law? Has it ever happened? When Hillary Clinton signed the small arms treaty with the U.N. there was a lot of flap about Obama using this to get around the 2nd amendment to curtail private gun ownership. I believe the resolution is that this little trick won't work but ... As long as we have such left minded people running our country who is to say that we won't sign an agreement with the U.N. to limit private gun ownership? Anyway, I was just thinking out loud that maybe this amendment was targeting that possibility ... This is what I was thinking and why I would vote yes. Now I'm confused. Somebody please clear this up.
Proud Army and ALNG veteran God Bless America!
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Moose24]
#1129175
10/29/14 06:54 AM
10/29/14 06:54 AM
|
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002 Millbrook, AL
leroyb
OP
8 point
|
OP
8 point
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,002
Millbrook, AL
|
This is very interesting. I would do some research before you jump on a "Yes" vote. The real kicker that is causing alarm is the wording "....that any restriction on this right would be subject to strict scrutiny". This wording seems to open the door for rulings affecting our right to bear arms where no such "open door" previously existed. http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/10/proposed_statewide_amendment_3.htmlThis seems like a do-nothing bill that has more of a chance to do harm than good. At this moment I am voting 'NO'. The fact that the AL.com article is written in support of the amendment is enough to make lean toward voting No.
"Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not." ~Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129180
10/29/14 07:00 AM
10/29/14 07:00 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,487 sellers, montgomery county
paulfish4570
12 point
|
12 point
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 5,487
sellers, montgomery county
|
if i am interpreting this correctly, the amendment would require, in effect, the state supreme court to let stand this right no matter the intended interference by any municipal/county agency/government. example: let's say the city of whoville, alabama, passes a city law that would cause an infringement of the state's interpretation of the second amendment, perhaps not allowing semiautomatic rifle/shotgun/pistol ownership in city limits. this city law would not stand strictest scrutiny, and would be struck down by the court.
but, hey, i could be wrong ...
paulfish4570 Joshua 1:9
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129185
10/29/14 07:03 AM
10/29/14 07:03 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
I think that under strict scrutiny it becomes the burden of the state to prove to the court that any infringement is in the clear interest of the public good. If the court went liberal then that might not take much to do.
I could be wrong though. Maybe one of our resident lawyers can explain it to us.
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Rmart30]
#1129186
10/29/14 07:03 AM
10/29/14 07:03 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899 Huntsville AL
Rocket62
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 7,899
Huntsville AL
|
Here is a 20 minute podcast with Rep Mike Jones the Pro 2a sponsor of this bill who explains why the bill was introduced and its intent. The host sorta hammers him about adding more amendments etc. He cuts him off for a break but then brings him back to finish the interview.. Host goes a little off topic toward the end but its a good listen. He also goes into what strict scrutiny is and why it was put into it. There are 3 levels of scrutiny in the judicial system.. rational intermediate, and strict with rational being the lowest. Sen Scott Beason also did a interview on this amendment and he was 100% in on it. Beason is about a pro 2a politician as I have met. If there was anything in it that he remotely thought would hurt our 2a rights he would bring it up. http://www.stationcaster.com/player_skinned.php?s=1291&c=6311&f=3544613 Well I listened to it in full and I'm still confused ... Not sure I like Mike Jones' logic about carrying in the state legislature.
I don't want to pass quietly into the night. I want to slide in sideways kickin and screamin Life really is awesome ... Soak it up while you can ...
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129197
10/29/14 07:15 AM
10/29/14 07:15 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,667 Central Alabama
QDMAV8R
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,667
Central Alabama
|
Careful what you vote for: The litmus test should be as simple as this: Have you lost any rights under the present constitution as written? YES- then vote to change the wording. NO-then don't give them the opporunity to change anything!
"Never met a deer that I didn't like" - QDMAV8R
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: paulfish4570]
#1129205
10/29/14 07:19 AM
10/29/14 07:19 AM
|
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 15,734 Elmore County
Frankie
Old Mossy Horns
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 15,734
Elmore County
|
if i am interpreting this correctly, the amendment would require, in effect, the state supreme court to let stand this right no matter the intended interference by any municipal/county agency/government. example: let's say the city of whoville, alabama, passes a city law that would cause an infringement of the state's interpretation of the second amendment, perhaps not allowing semiautomatic rifle/shotgun/pistol ownership in city limits. this city law would not stand strictest scrutiny, and would be struck down by the court.
but, hey, i could be wrong ... my understanding they can't do that now . i vote no .
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129218
10/29/14 07:29 AM
10/29/14 07:29 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936 Over Yonder
Clem
Mildly Quirky
|
Mildly Quirky
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936
Over Yonder
|
Why are they jacking around with rights already established - firearms, hunting/fishing - and "reaffirming" these rights?
Hey, did you know you have the right to free speech?
Why, sure. It's covered in the First Amendment. I don't like some of the things about it, like pornographic speech, but I'd rather have freedom than censorship.
Great! We have an amendment that AGAIN says you have the right to free speech! It also has a few other things but it DOES REALLY SAY that you have the right to free speech in Alabama and no one else can take away that basic right.
So, I already have it. Just like the Second Amendment and the Right to Bear Arms. Or the "right to hunt and fish" approved by Alabama voters several years ago and spelled out again. But you're wanting me to vote on something that again reaffirms what I already have?
Yes! Because we need to keep the Godless Commies and "others' from harming your rights!
Um, don't I already have those rights spelled out in the Constitution and Bill of Rights? Actually, those just affirm what we had to begin with. Why the new amendment?
You should approve of this! Why don't you want to support America and your rights?
/circularBSargumentsensue/
Last edited by Clem; 10/29/14 07:30 AM.
"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter
"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013
"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129239
10/29/14 07:47 AM
10/29/14 07:47 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 63,338 Luverne, AL
Skinny
GUVNER
|
GUVNER
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 63,338
Luverne, AL
|
They are making something that is simple and easy to understand porous and open to interpretation, maybe even a very liberal judge's interpretation.
I'm in the NO camp.
Never Trust Government
"You can be broke but you cant be poor." Ruthie-May Webster
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Wiley Coyote]
#1129246
10/29/14 07:52 AM
10/29/14 07:52 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,119 In front of my lathe
gundoc
14 point
|
14 point
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8,119
In front of my lathe
|
Me too.... SECTION 26 states: Right to bear arms. That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state. Section 36 goes on to say: Construction of Declaration of Rights. That this enumeration of certain rights shall not impair or deny others retained by the people; and, to guard against any encroachments on the rights herein retained, we declare that everything in this Declaration of Rights is excepted out of the general powers of government, and shall forever remain inviolate.
Since we already have laws on the books in the state that were not allowed by te constition such as needing a permit to carry concealed or in a vehicle, the constitution has already been inored. Who's to say if A3 is passed, it won't be misinterpreted as allowing restrictions on our 2A right??
Last edited by gundoc; 10/29/14 07:54 AM.
There are two types of gun enthusiasts ... Those who have been F#CKED by PTG and those who will be!
~ unknown
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: QDMAV8R]
#1129295
10/29/14 08:33 AM
10/29/14 08:33 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,069 Saraland, Al
BamaFan64
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,069
Saraland, Al
|
Careful what you vote for: The litmus test should be as simple as this: Have you lost any rights under the present constitution as written? YES- then vote to change the wording. NO-then don't give them the opporunity to change anything! This. Plus, it's something they're putting out there to play to the crowd and make it look like they're really doing something. For all it's bluster, let the Feds come in and say, fine, we'll cut your federal highway money and other federal funds and they'll cave in and do what DC tells them to. If they really want to impress us, what they should do is balance our state budget, cut waste and be able to give the feds the finger when they threaten to cut off federal money.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129371
10/29/14 10:15 AM
10/29/14 10:15 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,132 Clay-Trussville area
Big Al
12 point
|
12 point
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 6,132
Clay-Trussville area
|
So why is the NRA and Gun Owner's of America supporting the amendment if it's a bad thing? Both say to vote "YES" on this amendment.
"Said I never had much use for one; never said I didn't know how to use it". -Matthew Quigley in "Quigley Down Under"
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129461
10/29/14 12:01 PM
10/29/14 12:01 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936 Over Yonder
Clem
Mildly Quirky
|
Mildly Quirky
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936
Over Yonder
|
The writer can't even get the damned name of the NRA right in the first sentence?
'National Rifleman’s Association (NRA)"
It doesn't take a hell of a lot to double check the name of the NRA.
"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter
"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013
"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129555
10/29/14 02:14 PM
10/29/14 02:14 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609 Alabama
Rmart30
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609
Alabama
|
For this to be some kinda back door gun grabbing amendment it sure does have a ton of support for it from pro gun rights groups and advocates. http://www.examiner.com/article/alabama-...cid=db_articles
Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching - even when doing the wrong thing is legal. Aldo Leopold .. (except when it comes to trailer tags)
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: augustus_65]
#1129676
10/29/14 03:31 PM
10/29/14 03:31 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
Y'all do realize that under this amendment the strict scrutiny standard would make it much more difficult for any legislation restricting your gun rights to be upheld by a "liberal" judge. No, frankly I dont. But I want to understand it so that I can make an informed decision. I've been hoping someone would explain it in a clear way so I could grasp how this would keep a liberal judge from doing harm.
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129720
10/29/14 03:49 PM
10/29/14 03:49 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 921 'Possum Trot
59Hunter
6 point
|
6 point
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 921
'Possum Trot
|
“If the challenged government action [infringes upon] a fundamental right, ... a court will review that challenged action applying strict scrutiny.” Price–Cornelison v. Brooks, 524 F.3d 1103, 1109 (10th Cir.2008) (citations omitted). Under the strict-scrutiny analysis, a statute that infringes upon a fundamental right is presumed to be unconstitutional, and the State bears the burden “to prove that the [infringement] ‘furthers a compelling interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest.’ ” Citizens United v. Federal Election Comm'n, 558 U.S. 310, ––––, 130 S.Ct. 876, 898, 175 L.Ed.2d 753 (2010) (quoting Federal Election Comm'n v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc., 551 U.S. 449, 464, 127 S.Ct. 2652, 168 L.Ed.2d 329 (2007)).
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1129745
10/29/14 03:58 PM
10/29/14 03:58 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
Yes sirs, but here is the part I don't understand...
If the review of the court is the last say, and the job is only to prove that a new infringement on the right is justifiable in the governmentminterest, then what would preent a liberal legislature from passing an anti gun bill, presenting it to a liberal court, and then having the liberal court say it meets the standard of serving the government interests?
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: augustus_65]
#1129793
10/29/14 04:20 PM
10/29/14 04:20 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
This is an amendment to the Alabama Constitution. Are you worried that the state is somehow going to be taken over by gun grabbing liberals with majorities in both houses of the legislature and then liberals are going to take over the appellate courts? If so, you might want to pay closer attention to Alabama politics. We are living in a state where the number of guns each candidate for AG owns is a topic of discussion on AL.com. I understand, but it may not always be that way. My granddaddy probably never would have considered a great deal what's happening in this country now would come to pass either though.
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: 59Hunter]
#1129794
10/29/14 04:21 PM
10/29/14 04:21 PM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093 McCalla, AL
johnnyreb
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,093
McCalla, AL
|
There is precedent the courts have to follow, but in the most general since: nothing. However, the language in this Amendment doesn't create that opportunity, it already exists. However, if the right is not declared a fundamental right, a lesser standard of review would be applicable, making your hypothetical easier for restrictions to be upheld. Thank you sir. That helps. I will likely vote for it then.
"We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm."
George Orwell
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: augustus_65]
#1129803
10/29/14 04:28 PM
10/29/14 04:28 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,751 USA
Remington270
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,751
USA
|
This is an amendment to the Alabama Constitution. Are you worried that the state is somehow going to be taken over by gun grabbing liberals with majorities in both houses of the legislature and then liberals are going to take over the appellate courts? If so, you might want to pay closer attention to Alabama politics. We are living in a state where the number of guns each candidate for AG owns is a topic of discussion on AL.com. Wait, but if you're supporting the amendment, that would make YOU the one worried about gun grabbers, right?
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: 59Hunter]
#1129870
10/29/14 05:10 PM
10/29/14 05:10 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999 Holly Pond, AL
NightHunter
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999
Holly Pond, AL
|
There is precedent the courts have to follow, but in the most general since: nothing. However, the language in this Amendment doesn't create that opportunity, it already exists. However, if the right is not declared a fundamental right, a lesser standard of review would be applicable, making your hypothetical easier for restrictions to be upheld. So how has it not been eroded further already. It doesn't really make sense. It looks like if herd was an opening to defeat gun rights it would be happening. Just trying to make sense of this...
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: 59Hunter]
#1130109
10/30/14 03:54 AM
10/30/14 03:54 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999 Holly Pond, AL
NightHunter
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,999
Holly Pond, AL
|
I'm not sure I understand your question. The right is not absolute as it currently exists. For example, state laws prohibiting convicted felons from possessing firearms. That restriction has passed the strict scrutiny standard at the federal level. If a right is not an established fundament right, a rational basis standard is applied, which does not carry a presumption of unconstitutionality and is a very low hurdle for the state to meet. Maybe this is the better question. Legally speaking, what is the difference in a right and a fundamental right? And just exactly what does rational basis standard mean? All these legal terms written in seem to play a large role but us common folk don't know what they mean
Last edited by NightHunter; 10/30/14 03:54 AM.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: timbercruiser]
#1130698
10/30/14 01:53 PM
10/30/14 01:53 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 41,953 UR 6
top cat
Freak of Nature
|
Freak of Nature
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 41,953
UR 6
|
I'm checking one box then headed out. .02
LUCK:::; When presistence, dedication, perspiration and preparation meet up with opportunity!!! - - - - - - - -A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take everything you have. Thomas Jeferson - - - - - - - -
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1130712
10/30/14 02:01 PM
10/30/14 02:01 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609 Alabama
Rmart30
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 4,609
Alabama
|
This write up on amendment 3 is from the co founder of opencarry.org who is also a lawyer. In it he explains the levels of scrutiny and comments on how they effect things. http://johnpierceesq.com/?p=897
Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching - even when doing the wrong thing is legal. Aldo Leopold .. (except when it comes to trailer tags)
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Rmart30]
#1131482
10/31/14 06:03 AM
10/31/14 06:03 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 645 Lowndes County
augustus_65
4 point
|
4 point
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 645
Lowndes County
|
This write up on amendment 3 is from the co founder of opencarry.org who is also a lawyer. In it he explains the levels of scrutiny and comments on how they effect things. http://johnpierceesq.com/?p=897 I think that is a good synopsis. I agree with his interpretation and I would encourage anyone who supports the rights of gun owners to vote yes on the amendment.
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1131568
10/31/14 07:24 AM
10/31/14 07:24 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,080 Chelsea, AL
straycat
Old Mossy Horns
|
Old Mossy Horns
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 19,080
Chelsea, AL
|
I've been doing some research as well. Alabama Policy Institute issued this guide on #3. Read and then make your own informed decision that sits right with you. Voting is nothing to be taken lightly. http://www.alabamapolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014-Amendment-3-GTI.pdf
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever." Isaiah 40:8
"Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.� Samuel Adams
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: leroyb]
#1131586
10/31/14 07:43 AM
10/31/14 07:43 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,223 Cullman/Winston county line
Firefighter Bill
8 point
|
8 point
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,223
Cullman/Winston county line
|
I don't care what Jones ,Beason or the NRA support. They were for the bill that passed last year which many thought was a good thing. It actually made things worse in some cases. I for one wish I would have never become a life member of NRA. They have thrown us in the river in this and the one last year. I had rather them be forbidden to make any new restrictions that have to meet strict scrutiny to restrict guns. Seems simple to me .....VOTE NO
Lead, follow or get the HELL outa the way!
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: augustus_65]
#1131626
10/31/14 08:42 AM
10/31/14 08:42 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,409 Shelby County
Abram
10 point
|
10 point
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,409
Shelby County
|
This is an amendment to the Alabama Constitution. Are you worried that the state is somehow going to be taken over by gun grabbing liberals with majorities in both houses of the legislature and then liberals are going to take over the appellate courts? If so, you might want to pay closer attention to Alabama politics. We are living in a state where the number of guns each candidate for AG owns is a topic of discussion on AL.com. I would have never thought that our Federal Government could be take over by Liberals but it was for a short time and they shove the affordable care act down our throats. If enough liberals move into a state they can change the voting dynamics, wouldn't you agree it is possible?
But who prays for Satan? Who, in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most?
Mark Twain
|
|
|
Re: Amendment 3
[Re: Abram]
#1131639
10/31/14 08:50 AM
10/31/14 08:50 AM
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936 Over Yonder
Clem
Mildly Quirky
|
Mildly Quirky
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 51,936
Over Yonder
|
If enough liberals move into a state they can change the voting dynamics, wouldn't you agree it is possible?
Yes. It happened in Colorado, and it's happened or will happen in Montana and Wyoming. Likely could in Arizona, too, where more folks from California move each year and along with the Latino population are changing the older conservative stances a wee bit at a time. You still hear about Arpaio and other conservatives there but the libs are picking up areas in Arizona bit by bit. Actually, from Arizona north. It's like an eastern migration of libs. It's happening in other states, too, and in the Southeast.
"Hunting Politics are stupid!" - Farm Hunter
"Bible says you shouldn't put sugar in your cornbread." Dustin, 2013
"Best I can figure 97.365% of the general public is a paint chip eating, mouth breathing, certified dumbass." BCLC, 2020
|
|
|
|