PDA

View Full Version : Gura On Fox's America's News HQ


sholling
10-04-2009, 10:12 AM
This repeats at 1 PM today. About 30 minutes into the show they discuss McDonald and Gura and Dennis Henigan from the Brady Bunch. Henigan all but concedes the Chicago case but down plays the significance McDonald and even Heller saying that Heller allows regulation.

eaglemike
10-04-2009, 10:17 AM
Yupper, I thought the Henigan was pretty weak. Gura addressed the case clearly, maybe too briefly in initial reply. It's interesting to see the Brady types try to spin things.
all the best,
Mike

halifax
10-04-2009, 10:21 AM
This repeats at 1 PM today. About 30 minutes into the show the Discuss McDonald and Gura and Dennis Henigan from the Brady Bunch. Henigan all but concedes the Chicago case but down plays the significance McDonald and even Heller saying that Heller allows regulation.

Notice how Henigan sidesteps the questions? He just keeps rambling on with the same old "reasonable gun laws" crap. Doesn't ever address the handguns for self defense issue.

yellowfin
10-04-2009, 11:58 AM
What possible real issue can the other side REALLY have a sincere, logical, real world thought about? They've been so steeped in their own nonsense and pursue a nonsensical path using such sodomized logic there's simply no direction for them to go.

Kharn
10-04-2009, 12:32 PM
Heller did not ask for relief from registration, that wasnt his part of the plan. After McDonald, Palmer, Nordyke, Pena, etc are settled, then registration can be attacked.

Note that even Scalia picked up on that, and said (to the effect of) "as Heller's legal team did not object to registration, we presume it to be acceptable and a registration shall be granted" when he could have just as easily left it at "the gun shall be registered."

bwiese
10-04-2009, 2:15 PM
Heller did not ask for relief from registration, that wasnt his part of the plan. After McDonald, Palmer, Nordyke, Pena, etc are settled, then registration can be attacked.

I don't think we need to attack registration.

It's a wasted and perhaps futile effort - we could lose that and go backwards.

Registration concerns are fairly moot if guns & rights thereto can't be taken away.

And registration issue trivialities (oops I forgot to renew) won't be able to be used to remove gunrights - at best trivial admin penalties a la car registration.

Many folks worried about registration probably already have subscriptions to Guns & Ammo or Shotgun News, an NRA membership, Calguns web traffic, credit card receipts from the local gunshops and mail order suppliers, etc. It's pretty easy to say such a person owns gun(s), and sometimes infer the type and number.

Registration issues further become moot when - with 250 Million guns in the country - every cop's MDT unit states "Guns in home" on many/most addresses. At that point, the "owns guns" data becomes less cautionary and just "daily noise" - and we know what happens to noise: familiarity breeds contempt... one extra line of useless data on the MDT screen.

trashman
10-04-2009, 3:48 PM
I don't think we need to attack registration.


I agree. And as long as the courts hold that there is some right to privacy regarding those records, i.e., you can't PRAR+publish the contents of my safe the way that CCW records can be in some states*, then Bill is exactly right: it becomes another datapoint like "what other cars registered to this address(ee)".

If you have any libertarian leanings it (registration) is on some level completely distasteful. But from a political standpoint it would very much neutralize one of the last remaining "controls" (or harassments) the anti-gunnies want to throw in our way that resonates with neutral voters: in other words, registration sounds like a reasonable thing -- whereas opposing it may sound unreasonable to a neutral non-gunny voter.

The secondary benefit is that it will drive the true anti-gunny believers into proposing increasingly indefensible ideas (like, for example, that we have no right to privacy so a list of all the registered guns a person owns may be published in a town newspaper via PRAR).

--Neill

*ETA: in fact this happened in my, and ironically Waye LaPierre's, old hometown of Roanoke, VA (http://www.roanoke.com/gunpermits/).

Shotgun Man
10-04-2009, 4:15 PM
I agree. And as long as the courts hold that there is some right to privacy regarding those records, i.e., you can't PRAR+publish the contents of my safe the way that CCW records can be in some states*, then Bill is exactly right: it becomes another datapoint like "what other cars registered to this address(ee)".

If you have any libertarian leanings it (registration) is on some level completely distasteful. But from a political standpoint it would very much neutralize one of the last remaining "controls" (or harassments) the anti-gunnies want to throw in our way that resonates with neutral voters: in other words, registration sounds like a reasonable thing -- whereas opposing it may sound unreasonable to a neutral non-gunny voter.

The secondary benefit is that it will drive the true anti-gunny believers into proposing increasingly indefensible ideas (like, for example, that we have no right to privacy so a list of all the registered guns a person owns may be published in a town newspaper via PRAR).

--Neill

*ETA: in fact this happened in my, and ironically Waye LaPierre's, old hometown of Roanoke, VA (http://www.roanoke.com/gunpermits/).

I hope we would at least attempt to limit firearms registration. Even in CA, long arms aren't registered.

Certainly that info should be private. We are being compelled to disclose it.

I also think voter records should be private. Whose business is it whether I voted or registered to vote?

dantodd
10-04-2009, 4:19 PM
There are too many battles for fight before worrying about registration.

That being said it would be difficult to articulate a compelling state interest in requiring registration. If we get strict scrutiny I doubt registration would stand up.

trashman
10-04-2009, 4:21 PM
I also think voter records should be private. Whose business is it whether I voted or registered to vote?

There is a compelling interest in any democracy for openness in voting records: it's how free and open societies validate the honesty of their elections.

--Neill

dantodd
10-04-2009, 4:31 PM
There is a compelling interest in any democracy for openness in voting records: it's how free and open societies validate the honesty of their elections.

--Neill

I've always thought that our ballot tallies and serial numbers should be posted on the Internet. That way you could look up the serial number of your ballot stub and find out how your vote was tallied. It should be a relatively simple thing for the state to do and it would all but eliminate voter fraud as anomalies such as 100 ballots in sequence all voting identically. Plus every voter who chooses to check his tally would be an additional control.

Foghlai
10-04-2009, 4:34 PM
The segment was too short in my opinion. I really wanted to see Mr. Gura respond on the issue of scrutiny that Mr. Henigan brought up. Ah well, I guess we will just have to wait until Incorporation Day for some really fun debates.

Shotgun Man
10-04-2009, 4:47 PM
I've always thought that our ballot tallies and serial numbers should be posted on the Internet. That way you could look up the serial number of your ballot stub and find out how your vote was tallied. It should be a relatively simple thing for the state to do and it would all but eliminate voter fraud as anomalies such as 100 ballots in sequence all voting identically. Plus every voter who chooses to check his tally would be an additional control.

Yeah, that's a great idea. But why should my people know whether I am registered to vote or to what party I'm registered?

You can have the openess without disclosure.

Also, I'm leery of the government using voter registration rosters to target people.

Fjold
10-04-2009, 6:53 PM
Yeah, that's a great idea. But why should my people know whether I am registered to vote or to what party I'm registered?

You can have the openess without disclosure.

Also, I'm leery of the government using voter registration rosters to target people.


Local, State and Federal elections require registration before you can exercise your right to vote. In some case unless you are a registered member of a particular party, you cannot vote in certain primary elections.

gcrtkd
10-04-2009, 8:42 PM
The segment was too short in my opinion. I really wanted to see Mr. Gura respond on the issue of scrutiny that Mr. Henigan brought up. Ah well, I guess we will just have to wait until Incorporation Day for some really fun debates.

Which raises the question... when 2A incorporation is finally and officially declared, will gunnies nationwide recognize "Incorporation Day"? Will they take the day off from work, keep the kids home from school, and head to the range to enjoy their rights and live history? Ahhh, that has a nice ring to it... Incorporation Day.

-gcrtkd

Kharn
10-05-2009, 4:45 AM
I don't think we need to attack registration.

It's a wasted and perhaps futile effort - we could lose that and go backwards.

Registration concerns are fairly moot if guns & rights thereto can't be taken away.

And registration issue trivialities (oops I forgot to renew) won't be able to be used to remove gunrights - at best trivial admin penalties a la car registration.

Many folks worried about registration probably already have subscriptions to Guns & Ammo or Shotgun News, an NRA membership, Calguns web traffic, credit card receipts from the local gunshops and mail order suppliers, etc. It's pretty easy to say such a person owns gun(s), and sometimes infer the type and number.

Registration issues further become moot when - with 250 Million guns in the country - every cop's MDT unit states "Guns in home" on many/most addresses. At that point, the "owns guns" data becomes less cautionary and just "daily noise" - and we know what happens to noise: familiarity breeds contempt... one extra line of useless data on the MDT screen.The problem is when that registration data is used for nefarious purposes. For example, Gov O'Malley of MD has stated he created a map of Maryland with a mark showing every gun owner (more correctly the vast majority of handgun/black rifle owners) in the state using the state-level registration data, so he knows who lives in the area if there is an 'issue.' The MD State Police have also started making "spot checks" (without a warrant, just a knock on the door by two troopers for all your neighbors to see) of handgun/black rifle owners to see if they still have those guns, as face-to-face sales of such guns are banned.
I've always thought that our ballot tallies and serial numbers should be posted on the Internet. That way you could look up the serial number of your ballot stub and find out how your vote was tallied. It should be a relatively simple thing for the state to do and it would all but eliminate voter fraud as anomalies such as 100 ballots in sequence all voting identically. Plus every voter who chooses to check his tally would be an additional control.That becomes a problem when someone demands to looks at your reciept (or demands your ballot number) and then checks how you voted. Even if you gave a false number it could cause you harm if they saw the false number voted the wrong way.

yellowfin
10-05-2009, 6:19 AM
The problem is when that registration data is used for nefarious purposes. For example, Gov O'Malley of MD has stated he created a map of Maryland with a mark showing every gun owner (more correctly the vast majority of handgun/black rifle owners) in the state using the state-level registration data, so he knows who lives in the area if there is an 'issue.' The MD State Police have also started making "spot checks" (without a warrant, just a knock on the door by two troopers for all your neighbors to see) of handgun/black rifle owners to see if they still have those guns, as face-to-face sales of such guns are banned.
That becomes a problem when someone demands to looks at your reciept (or demands your ballot number) and then checks how you voted. Even if you gave a false number it could cause you harm if they saw the false number voted the wrong way. All of which might be challenged when/if we get the P&I clause restored under McDonald. There's so much tyrannical crap like that which needs to be beaten down; Maryland, New York, and New Jersey need exorcisms performed on them.

nobody_special
10-06-2009, 11:34 AM
The problem is when that registration data is used for nefarious purposes.
Yes, and there are still good reasons to challenge registration. Recall hurricane Katrina, for example; it was illegal at the time, but that didn't save anyone.

The issue here is that the only purposes of registration are nefarious.

hoffmang
10-06-2009, 11:57 AM
The issue here is that the only purposes of registration are nefarious.
As much as I agree with your policy argument, I don't agree with you legally. Registration of automobiles was done originally to deter theft and later to tax them. Cutting down on the theft of firearms may be a real and articulable state interest that is minimally invasive.

I don't like it, but I'm saying it is not outlandish - like the usual anti-gun b.s.

-Gene

dexter9659
10-06-2009, 1:44 PM
As much as I agree with your policy argument, I don't agree with you legally. Registration of automobiles was done originally to deter theft and later to tax them. Cutting down on the theft of firearms may be a real and articulable state interest that is minimally invasive.

I don't like it, but I'm saying it is not outlandish - like the usual anti-gun b.s.

-Gene

And suppressors originally were outlawed to do away with poaching. Now they require a costly tax stamp. Dont forget about the Bay Bridge's toll which was only to last till the construction costs were paid... Original intentions seem to become lost over time, then transformed into something never intended by the originators. More often than not it becomes about $$$.

artherd
10-06-2009, 2:04 PM
baby steps guys

n2k
10-06-2009, 2:35 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=10363721&referralPlaylistId=dbbb584287389f0f3c6fa67a6fec138 e7d12decc

joelberg
10-06-2009, 2:44 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=10363721&referralPlaylistId=dbbb584287389f0f3c6fa67a6fec138 e7d12decc

Thanks, this was exactly what I was looking for.