A federal judge has ruled that California's decade-old assault weapons ban is unconstitutional

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
Counterpoint from the onion:
Exactly. The only nation where it regularly happens because we have the freedom to express our mental illness. Only those who are free to express their mental illness will see a need to find a cure for it. Pandora's Box has been opened and now we need to deal with the 'loveliness' within.

Your solutions sometimes seek to apply logic absent psychological understanding, as I sometimes remark.

My comments were directed at what I feel is an unconstitutional ban on assault weapons in California that is unfair to those who want to own them in that state. I gave reasons as to why I felt that. None of those did you address. I am not opposed to the elimination of the 2nd but I don't think it will happen if ever for many many generations. The absurdity or wisdom of the 2nd is meaningless with regard to it soon being eliminated. Meanwhile the mentally ill will turn to guns for mass execution. Do you experience full inner peace? If you can solve that conundrum, I believe you will truly know what the real answer is.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
That is nothing but a dream. SCOTUS this year or next will rule that being able to carry a gun conceal and/or in the open(up to the state) is a constitutional right. It's highly unlikely that will get changed anytime if ever . Welcome to the reality.
Now you’re just being silly. It’s not a dream, it’s something you change one day at a time the same way conservatives changed it.
 

weblooker2021

Senior member
Jan 18, 2021
749
254
96
Now you’re just being silly. It’s not a dream, it’s something you change one day at a time the same way conservatives changed it.
The only change i am seeing at this time is gun right expansion. Let me know when you see it going the other way.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
Taxes on working people are higher in Texas than in California, genius.

It’s NIMBYism and a lack of housing production, full stop.
The logical answer to NIMBYism is the elimination of private ownership of land. State ownership or federal ownership can simply pass laws that mandate millions and millions of places to live where private ownership now prevents it. We can assign everybody their own cubical by lottery and then we will all be made to live where the fuck we are told to live instead of just throwing a few old people out of their homes and letting them walk away with all that fucking equity they somehow don't seem to want to collect. No more homelessness, ever. It's simple logic. True equality instead of the have's owning all the land in demand.
 
Last edited:

Pipeline 1010

Golden Member
Dec 2, 2005
1,960
782
136
Good. Banning assault rifles has been utterly useless. Now we can focus on solutions that can actually reduce gun violence.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Taxes on working people are higher in Texas than in California, genius.

It’s NIMBYism and a lack of housing production, full stop.

What in the flying fuck are you smoking? Texas doesn't have a state income tax lol.

Property taxes are 1.5 - 3.0% depending on where you live - which is based on your property value - and there is also homestead exemptions that everyone who lives in a home qualifies for. Home values are also drastically lower in TX. So a shithole home of $50k pays practically nothing in taxes, whereas a shithome $800k home in CA/NY pays substantially more regardless of the tax rate.


CA/IL/NY all have high taxes - high income taxes, high sales tax, and medium to high property taxes. Try again you dumb twat.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
What in the flying fuck are you smoking? Texas doesn't have a state income tax lol.

Property taxes are 1.5 - 3.0% depending on where you live - which is based on your property value - and there is also homestead exemptions that everyone who lives in a home qualifies for. Home values are also drastically lower in TX. So a shithole home of $50k pays practically nothing in taxes, whereas a shithome $800k home in CA/NY pays substantially more regardless of the tax rate.


CA/IL/NY all have high taxes - high income taxes, high sales tax, and medium to high property taxes. Try again you dumb twat.

Lol.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,425
136
If we use the talking points used in heller then the states are allowed to have reasonable restrictions on the 2nd amendment, which sounds like what this law was doing. So in theory this ruling should be overturned, especially since it breaks prior precedence. That being said, the Supreme Court and its federalist society members are really good about getting the ruling they want using whatever justifications they feel like, even if it is counter to one of their previous rulings.


However, I agree with eski, a complete ban on guns or a repeal of the second amendment seems to be the only reasonable course of action here.

A country that cannot protect its citizens is no longer a country, its anarchy and that seems to be the direction we are heading.
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,695
8,095
136
If we use the talking points used in heller then the states are allowed to have reasonable restrictions on the 2nd amendment, which sounds like what this law was doing. So in theory this ruling should be overturned, especially since it breaks prior precedence. That being said, the Supreme Court and its federalist society members are really good about getting the ruling they want using whatever justifications they feel like, even if it is counter to one of their previous rulings.


However, I agree with eski, a complete ban on guns or a repeal of the second amendment seems to be the only reasonable course of action here.

A country that cannot protect its citizens is no longer a country, its anarchy and that seems to be the direction we are heading.
Do you actually believe that if guns were banned, or the Second Amendment abolished, that there wouldn't almost immediately be a hot civil war?

Like, you think millions of people are going to just go and turn their guns in and drive home and binge watch storage wars?

Y'all are still own-goaling yourselves here. I'm not sure why any liberal thinks that when the Republicans control the White House, Senate, House, and Supreme Court, that the only people allowed to have guns should be the US military and the Minneapolis Police Department.

Safely owning and operating a firearm isn't just a right, it's a responsibility. Seriously. Guess I'll change my signature.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
How dare you ruin his talking points and flawed ideology with data.

For shame.

lol toolbags can't even make valid arguments. Sad.


lol link to some opinion piece. No actual data is presented, just some map as a citation. None of the actual data is actually presented. But they did make sure to clarify the source is......full of shit lol.

These estimates are from 2018 because that’s the last time the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, a left-leaning Washington think tank, updated its distributional analysis of state and local tax systems,


The data isn't based on how much the poor get taxed. It's simply based on comparison of poor to rich in the state.

So in effect, it's not based on how much the poor and middle-class are taxed - but rather, how they are taxed in proportion to the rich. That has zero bearing on the argument or topic. So once again, you're a child that has zero clue what you're talking about.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

rommelrommel

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2002
4,410
3,183
146
The very impossibility of rescinding the second speaks to the likelihood of a workaround ban working any better.

Some kind of mostly useless assault weapons ban that doesn't seek to confiscate anything and that the manufacturers will sidestep (and many States would probably counter legislate) might not lead to much violence, but any kind of confiscation attempts? That would not end well.
 

KMFJD

Lifer
Aug 11, 2005
30,031
45,270
136
While I agree it’s very unlikely it should still be the goal. It’s one of the dumbest things ever put into the constitution.
It's definitely a curse on the nation and is holding it back, i'm not against gun ownership, but it should be a pita to purchase one and you should be licensed
 

Leeea

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2020
3,795
5,549
136
hmm

As a resident of CA, it occurs to me the following restrictions should be imposed immediately:
All magazines should be limited to 1 bullet.
chambering a bullet for any reason should be a felony.

That seems very reasonable gun control to me.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
lol toolbags can't even make valid arguments. Sad.



lol link to some opinion piece. No actual data is presented, just some map as a citation. None of the actual data is actually presented. But they did make sure to clarify the source is......full of shit lol.




The data isn't based on how much the poor get taxed. It's simply based on comparison of poor to rich in the state.

So in effect, it's not based on how much the poor and middle-class are taxed - but rather, how they are taxed in proportion to the rich. That has zero bearing on the argument or topic. So once again, you're a child that has zero clue what you're talking about.
I hope you realize how funny I find it that you’re going to accuse me of not knowing what I’m talking about when you’re too lazy and/or dimwitted to understand the paper you’re complaining about.

While the study was primarily done to see the relative tax burden between the poor and the rich in order to do so they had to figure out what that tax burden is, which is what the link I sent you to was discussing! (The data is contained in figures 4 and 5) Every time I think you can’t make yourself look dumber you somehow outdo yourself.

The fact that red states are often more expensive from a tax perspective for regular people than blue ones shouldn’t really surprise anyone. Blue states often rely on progressive income taxes while red states rely on regressive sales taxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi and Leeea

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,548
15,425
136
Do you actually believe that if guns were banned, or the Second Amendment abolished, that there wouldn't almost immediately be a hot civil war?

Like, you think millions of people are going to just go and turn their guns in and drive home and binge watch storage wars?

Y'all are still own-goaling yourselves here. I'm not sure why any liberal thinks that when the Republicans control the White House, Senate, House, and Supreme Court, that the only people allowed to have guns should be the US military and the Minneapolis Police Department.

Safely owning and operating a firearm isn't just a right, it's a responsibility. Seriously. Guess I'll change my signature.

If the only thing holding back a civil war is allowing people to own guns then I say lets get it over with already.

Owning a gun is only a right because of a precedent breaking ruling by a supreme court that's been overrun by federalist society members. The fact that you think a civil war over guns is even a possibility shows just how fucked up that ruling was and how anti democratic it is.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
I hope you realize how funny I find it that you’re going to accuse me of not knowing what I’m talking about when you’re too lazy and/or dimwitted to understand the paper you’re complaining about.

While the study was primarily done to see the relative tax burden between the poor and the rich in order to do so they had to figure out what that tax burden is, which is what the link I sent you to was discussing! (The data is contained in figures 4 and 5) Every time I think you can’t make yourself look dumber you somehow outdo yourself.

The fact that red states are often more expensive from a tax perspective for regular people than blue ones shouldn’t really surprise anyone. Blue states often rely on progressive income taxes while red states rely on regressive sales taxes.
It makes no sense to me to call him lazy/stupid when he is willing to spend enormous effort to creating a highly convoluted and elaborate effort to pretend into existence of an alternate imaginary reality. The fact, it seems to me, is that the real motivation that drives him is an attempt to deny his own hidden feelings of inferiority. Sadly, however, we create what we fear. He does LOOK stupid and lazy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
73,286
6,351
126
If the only thing holding back a civil war is allowing people to own guns then I say lets get it over with already.

Owning a gun is only a right because of a precedent breaking ruling by a supreme court that's been overrun by federalist society members. The fact that you think a civil war over guns is even a possibility shows just how fucked up that ruling was and how anti democratic it is.
Wouldn’t that mean the Supreme Court is anti democratic? Wasn’t it 5 to 4 Bush won Florida when actually Gore did.
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,695
8,095
136
If the only thing holding back a civil war is allowing people to own guns then I say lets get it over with already.

Owning a gun is only a right because of a precedent breaking ruling by a supreme court that's been overrun by federalist society members. The fact that you think a civil war over guns is even a possibility shows just how fucked up that ruling was and how anti democratic it is.
No, guns aren't the only thing holding back a civil war.

If the Federal Government were to say tomorrow, "Guns are illegal, turn them in here", there would be. Not just individuals vs. Federal Government, but States vs. Federal Government.

Also: how exactly do you propose that the Federal Government is going to go about getting the hundreds of millions of guns? Door-to-door? Using the police or military? In and of itself, confiscating guns IS. NEVER. GOING. TO. HAPPEN.

Continuing to talk about banning guns is hilarious because it's delusional, at best.

Never mind the Federalist Society, prior Supreme Court rulings, or the actual Constitution.

Again, you seriously want the only people with guns to be Tom Cotton's US military and the Minneapolis Police Department. Yowsa.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
I hope you realize how funny I find it that you’re going to accuse me of not knowing what I’m talking about when you’re too lazy and/or dimwitted to understand the paper you’re complaining about.

While the study was primarily done to see the relative tax burden between the poor and the rich in order to do so they had to figure out what that tax burden is, which is what the link I sent you to was discussing! (The data is contained in figures 4 and 5) Every time I think you can’t make yourself look dumber you somehow outdo yourself.

The fact that red states are often more expensive from a tax perspective for regular people than blue ones shouldn’t really surprise anyone. Blue states often rely on progressive income taxes while red states rely on regressive sales taxes.

And this is what you're not getting you incompetent imbecile.

Having less of a difference between the percentage that poor people pay and middle income - or upper middle income - or rich people pay - has ZERO bearing on your overall tax burden detective dipshit. The ACTUAL dollar amount of what the low/middle class pays is what we are discussing, but here you are being a 3 year old and making strawmen with unrelated articles.

The overall state budget of Texas is roughly $107B vs California's $214B. So roughly double the rate, for nowhere near double the population. Ever care to factor in shit like that into your retarded calculations? No, of course not, because you're a dimwit 2 year old that doesn't understand the basics of taxation.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
It makes no sense to me to call him lazy/stupid when he is willing to spend enormous effort to creating a highly convoluted and elaborate effort to pretend into existence of an alternate imaginary reality. The fact, it seems to me, is that the real motivation that drives him is an attempt to deny his own hidden feelings of inferiority. Sadly, however, we create what we fear. He does LOOK stupid and lazy.

Neither of you have had any actual real or rational arguments lol. You just post an unrelated argument with an unrelated study and call it a day.

How low is your IQ exactly?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Pohemi

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
85,634
50,860
136
And this is what you're not getting you incompetent imbecile.

Having less of a difference between the percentage that poor people pay and middle income - or upper middle income - or rich people pay - has ZERO bearing on your overall tax burden detective dipshit. The ACTUAL dollar amount of what the low/middle class pays is what we are discussing, but here you are being a 3 year old and making strawmen with unrelated articles.

The overall state budget of Texas is roughly $107B vs California's $214B. So roughly double the rate, for nowhere near double the population. Ever care to factor in shit like that into your retarded calculations? No, of course not, because you're a dimwit 2 year old that doesn't understand the basics of taxation.
Okay it’s even funnier that you didn’t understand it even after I explained it to you.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
16,094
8,109
136
While I agree it’s very unlikely it should still be the goal. It’s one of the dumbest things ever put into the constitution.
It wasn't dumb at all for the young imperiled nation that existed when it was drafted. It's dumb now because of how it has been interpreted and because the nation isn't young or imperiled any more.
And, yeah, 0.0% probability that any constitutional amendment gets passed in our life times, never mind nullifying second - we are way to divided for that to happen. Given the current prevalence of gun ownership in America ( > than one gun in circulation for every man, woman and child in the US), it's a battle that is already lost, IMHO.