User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 5:07:56 PM EDT
[#1]
“Working from her office”
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 6:51:01 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd say the Timbs decision could matter to a lot of people -- even gun owners. The MN DNR will take your gun, truck, boat, and probably the shirt off your back if they think you've been poaching the king's game. Time will tell. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 7:13:11 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Another person who has no idea what he's talking about.  Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
701 days will she make it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 7:13:54 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You may be a king or a little street sweeper... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/20/2019 8:27:00 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since MacDonald and Heller, blue states have been banning everything they can and SCOTUS doesn't give a fuck. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd say the Timbs decision could matter to a lot of people -- even gun owners. The MN DNR will take your gun, truck, boat, and probably the shirt off your back if they think you've been poaching the king's game. Time will tell. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 10:12:36 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since MacDonald and Heller, blue states have been banning everything they can and SCOTUS doesn't give a fuck. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd say the Timbs decision could matter to a lot of people -- even gun owners. The MN DNR will take your gun, truck, boat, and probably the shirt off your back if they think you've been poaching the king's game. Time will tell. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 10:15:06 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You really need to loosen up your tinfoil. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:17:36 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You need to go buy a gun in DC and get back to me. I don't care about DC, CA, NY, or NJ and their blue-state gun laws. MN has enough problems with our tiny R majority in the state senate. This is a SCOTUS thread and I'm just here to mock your sweeping predictions as to what Roberts and the Court will do. Let's get back to why you think Roberts with side with Bryer and the 3 female justices in 80% of future 5-4 decisions. Is that just for the reminder of this term (June, 2019), or until there's a change in the composition of the Court? Or just for cases that you think are important? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:26:33 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And there you go moving the goal posts again. I don't care about DC, CA, NY, or NJ and their blue-state gun laws. MN has enough problems with our tiny R majority in the state senate. This is a SCOTUS thread and I'm just here to mock your sweeping predictions as to what Roberts and the Court will do. Let's get back to why you think Roberts with side with Bryer and the 3 female justices in 80% of future 5-4 decisions. Is that just for the reminder of this term (June, 2019), or until there's a change in the composition of the Court? Or just for cases that you think are important? So far they had enough clout to not even HEAR cases. Now they have enough to ensure that we continue to lose. I am shifting nothing. Until Roberts leaves the bench 80% of his rulings will match the liberal justices and that EXCLUDES 9-0 decisions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:36:25 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I predicted that the SCOTUS would ignore all state infringments on gun rights. So far they had enough clout to not even HEAR cases. Now they have enough to ensure that we continue to lose. I am shifting nothing. Until Roberts leaves the bench 80% of his rulings will match the liberal justices and that EXCLUDES 9-0 decisions. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted: And there you go moving the goal posts again. I don't care about DC, CA, NY, or NJ and their blue-state gun laws. MN has enough problems with our tiny R majority in the state senate. This is a SCOTUS thread and I'm just here to mock your sweeping predictions as to what Roberts and the Court will do. Let's get back to why you think Roberts with side with Bryer and the 3 female justices in 80% of future 5-4 decisions. Is that just for the reminder of this term (June, 2019), or until there's a change in the composition of the Court? Or just for cases that you think are important? So far they had enough clout to not even HEAR cases. Now they have enough to ensure that we continue to lose. I am shifting nothing. Until Roberts leaves the bench 80% of his rulings will match the liberal justices and that EXCLUDES 9-0 decisions. I'm calling another goal post repositioning penalty. Do you count concurrences? What if Roberts agrees with the 4 lefties in the judgement but writes or joins a concurrence? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:38:26 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK, so now it's 80% of 5-4, 6-3, 7-2 and 8-1 decisions? That really adjusts the odds in your favor compared to your original claim. I'm calling another goal post repositioning penalty. Do you count concurrences? What if Roberts agrees with the 4 lefties in the judgement but writes or joins a concurrence? Roberts is a liberal on the court. Full stop. I guess coming from the state that gave us Senator SNL I can understand the problems in defining what is liberal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:50:33 AM EDT
[#12]
Generally speaking a good predictor of what someone will do in the future is what they have already done in the past.
Which is why we do "background" checks on people in line for important positions. That also affects horse racing odds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:52:55 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fine 5-4. This is simply votes. Who gives a fuck what he writes. Roberts is a liberal on the court. Full stop. I guess coming from the state that gave us Senator SNL I can understand the problems in defining what is liberal. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
OK, so now it's 80% of 5-4, 6-3, 7-2 and 8-1 decisions? That really adjusts the odds in your favor compared to your original claim. I'm calling another goal post repositioning penalty. Do you count concurrences? What if Roberts agrees with the 4 lefties in the judgement but writes or joins a concurrence? Roberts is a liberal on the court. Full stop. I guess coming from the state that gave us Senator SNL I can understand the problems in defining what is liberal. I disagree that what is written doesn't matter (see Thomas and Gorsuch concurrences in the Timbs decision yesterday) but just counting votes does make it more objective. I'm not here to establish my conservative bona fides. This is just a fun little exercise to see if you're right on how Robert's behaves as the Court's new swing vote. Tag me in June when the term is done and we'll count up the votes between now and then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:53:38 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Generally speaking a good predictor of what someone will do in the future is what they have already done in the past. Which is why we do "background" checks on people in line for important positions. That also affects horse racing odds. I chalked it up to Roberts wanting to protect the image of the court as "non partisan" With Kennedy gone, Roberts now has to go full SJW to keep the decisions where they need to be in the name of progressive justice. Catholics and Jews interpreting a document written by Protestants is an interesting phenomena to behold. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:54:21 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Great. I disagree that what is written doesn't matter (see Thomas and Gorsuch concurrences in the Timbs decision yesterday) but just counting votes does make it more objective. I'm not here to establish my conservative bona fides. This is just a fun little exercise to see if you're right on how Robert's behaves as the Court's new swing vote. Tag me in June when the term is done and we'll count up the votes between now and then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 11:56:32 AM EDT
[#16]
RBG could star in The Walking Dead.
She can barely walk and emits a frothy gurgle |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/21/2019 12:25:38 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Deal. I would like to have a sticky in the legal section to keep track, as this will disappear on GD quickly. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Great. I disagree that what is written doesn't matter (see Thomas and Gorsuch concurrences in the Timbs decision yesterday) but just counting votes does make it more objective. I'm not here to establish my conservative bona fides. This is just a fun little exercise to see if you're right on how Robert's behaves as the Court's new swing vote. Tag me in June when the term is done and we'll count up the votes between now and then. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2019 12:06:53 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You really need to loosen up your tinfoil. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I'd say the Timbs decision could matter to a lot of people -- even gun owners. The MN DNR will take your gun, truck, boat, and probably the shirt off your back if they think you've been poaching the king's game. Time will tell. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2019 12:14:33 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OK, so now it's 80% of 5-4, 6-3, 7-2 and 8-1 decisions? That really adjusts the odds in your favor compared to your original claim. I'm calling another goal post repositioning penalty. Do you count concurrences? What if Roberts agrees with the 4 lefties in the judgement but writes or joins a concurrence? He's saying Roberts is going to be a swing vote that more often than not swings lefty. An example was how he morphed into a blindfolded contortion artist to save "Obamacare". 
Some tinfoil hat people think "they" have something on Roberts. His views have certainly "evolved" over time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2019 12:20:42 PM EDT
[#20]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/22/2019 12:21:35 PM EDT
[#21]
In order to quell dissension they'll have to trot her out every 6 months or so or a passable replica...of course the replicaonly has to be "passable" to the Marxist media and their SWAMP agents on forums.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2019 4:50:24 PM EDT
[#22]
Any photos of RBG in public lately? I've haven't seen or heard of any.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2019 4:58:49 PM EDT
[#23]
I read the transcripts of cases argued this week and Ginsburg sounds pretty sharp in her questioning
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2019 5:09:08 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Obamacare was the first warning sign. I chalked it up to Roberts wanting to protect the image of the court as "non partisan" With Kennedy gone, Roberts now has to go full SJW to keep the decisions where they need to be in the name of progressive justice. Catholics and Jews interpreting a document written by Protestants is an interesting phenomena to behold. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Generally speaking a good predictor of what someone will do in the future is what they have already done in the past. Which is why we do "background" checks on people in line for important positions. That also affects horse racing odds. I chalked it up to Roberts wanting to protect the image of the court as "non partisan" With Kennedy gone, Roberts now has to go full SJW to keep the decisions where they need to be in the name of progressive justice. Catholics and Jews interpreting a document written by Protestants is an interesting phenomena to behold. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2019 5:46:16 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since MacDonald and Heller, blue states have been banning everything they can and SCOTUS doesn't give a fuck. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'd say the Timbs decision could matter to a lot of people -- even gun owners. The MN DNR will take your gun, truck, boat, and probably the shirt off your back if they think you've been poaching the king's game. Time will tell. LIberals and conservatives came together in this case because it was a heroin dealer and asset forfeiture is bullshit. the liberals wanted to support heroin dealers and any other criminal they can. conservatives wanted due process. that alignment will NOT be repeated in support of gun owners GUARANFUCKINGTEED. I will predict over 80% of future 5-4 decisions will be roberts siding with the communists. want to go against that? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-01/hold-the-revolution-roberts-keeps-joining-high-court-liberals |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/2/2019 6:01:04 PM EDT
[#26]
Roberts didn't switch. Much like his father did in appointing Souter,Dubya decided to appoint a liberal.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
