Iowa gay marriage ban ruled unconstitutional

[ocnblu]

I'm going to get all Northern California on your asses and just say... love one another.

[Robert Hall]

Rather surprising to see Iowa doing this...I guess they aren't as repressed and backward as Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas or other states in the middle of the country.

[Croc]

Rather surprising to see Iowa doing this...I guess they aren't as repressed and backward as Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas or other states in the middle of the country.

No, Iowa isn't. There's a reason they have the first D primaries in the election cycle.

[Satty]

I group Iowa in with Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois in the more progressive upper-midwest than with Nebraska or Missouri in the culturally and socially backwards, repressed lower-midwest.

[Robert Hall]

I group Iowa in with Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois in the more progressive upper-midwest than with Nebraska or Missouri in the culturally and socially backwards, repressed lower-midwest.

Good point..they usually are a blue state in the elections.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

socially backwards, repressed lower-midwest.

Instead of using pointless inflammatory words like those, how about point out the specifics.

Texas may repress gay marriage, but they definitely have more liberal (free) gun control laws than say California, which represses both.

Would you then say that Texas is less repressive than California since on the whole it represses less people? I doubt it. No pun intended.

California does not take too kindly to its conservatives in parts of the state... do they oppress conservatives/libertarians? In other parts of the state they do not take too kindly to liberals... do they too oppress liberals?

Ever been to a Californian college? Many of them, especially Berkley will boo off conservative speakers (even if they are not even speaking of social issues) just because they are conservative and do not have the same views as the majority up there. That, by definition, is the suppression of free speech.

So please, be more specific in your claims instead of just using borderline hate words.

[SoCalCTS]

Instead of using pointless inflammatory words like those, how about point out the specifics.

Texas may repress gay marriage, but they definitely have more liberal (free) gun control laws than say California, which represses both.

Would you then say that Texas is less repressive than California since on the whole it represses less people? I doubt it. No pun intended.

California does not take too kindly to its conservatives in parts of the state... do they oppress conservatives/libertarians? In other parts of the state they do not take too kindly to liberals... do they too oppress liberals?

Ever been to a Californian college? Many of them, especially Berkley will boo off conservative speakers (even if they are not even speaking of social issues) just because they are conservative and do not have the same views as the majority up there. That, by definition, is the suppression of free speech.

So please, be more specific in your claims instead of just using borderline hate words.

Umm last time i checked you could buy just about any gun you wanted in California. Also, booing someone is not repression. California is the most free and open state out there. Home to great Conservatives presidents/congressman and liberal senators/congressman.

Whats so great about Texas???? oh... that's right. NOTHING

[Camino LS6]

California is the most free and open state out there.

:rotflmao:

[Robert Hall]

California is the most free and open state out there.

Agreed... it has a lot going for it, infinitely preferable to Texas from my POV. Besides Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, California is one of the few states I could see myself living in...

[Satty]

I live in a socially backwards, repressed state and I can tell you that these people aren't interested in "freedom" they're interested in having things the way they want them in spite of the Constitution or any laws.

[Croc]

Agreed... it has a lot going for it, infinitely preferable to Texas from my POV. Besides Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, California is one of the few states I could see myself living in...

It's a pretty "just" state too...at least within the legal framework. It's interesting that the state has a lot of "protection" laws for the environment, minorities, and other underserved populations/causes, yet the localities try so hard to skirt the laws whenever they can. Very interesting dichotomy.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Umm last time i checked you could buy just about any gun you wanted in California. Also, booing someone is not repression. California is the most free and open state out there. Home to great Conservatives presidents/congressman and liberal senators/congressman.

Whats so great about Texas???? oh... that's right. NOTHING

You can buy any handgun in California as long as it is on some BS "safe" gun list.

You have to wait 10 days before receiving your firearm, which has done all of nothing to stem crime other than make people wait.

If you have the wrong stock on your rifle it is now an "assault weapon." Yes that's right, if i put on a collapsible stock on a rifle that has a detachable magazine, it is now magically an "assault rifle" even though its overall length well conforms to Federal Laws even while fully collapsed.

California has amongst the strictest gun laws of any state in the union, and they still have very high crime rates. It is not hard to argue that these laws are in violation of the 2nd Amendment.

California is NOT the most free and open state. If it were there would be fewer laws, more freedoms (less regulation). People would not be taxed at the 2nd or 3rd highest rates in the Union if it were truly the most free state (to pay for all the social welfare programs, which is still draining the money of the state even with high tax rates). Minimum wage laws would not be substantially higher than they are elsewhere (contributing to higher unemployment, higher inflation and more incentive to use illegal labor). Which cheats people from their freedom to get a job.

California is the most socialist state in the Union and its declining economy (on a global scale) as well as a large number of middle class people leaving the state is a clear indication that its policies have not worked very well (and the govornator is a RINO at best).

Freedom is not about telling you how to live your lives. Its about NOT telling you how to live your lives.

Being free and just in one area while being repressive and unjust in another area does not a free state make.

Edited April 11, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Camino LS6]

Like I said:

:rotflmao:

[regfootball]

I group Iowa in with Minnesota, Wisconsin and Illinois in the more progressive upper-midwest than with Nebraska or Missouri in the culturally and socially backwards, repressed lower-midwest.

overall possibly. but trust me, get outside the very center of the metro areas and the groups you refer to are actually quite present in spades.

[Satty]

I know, I used to live in rural Illinois. Iowa is a unique case because it is a mostly rural state, but it identifies politically with states that have larger urban populations. Iowa has a long history of social progress and equal rights for both women and minorities.

[Robert Hall]

overall possibly. but trust me, get outside the very center of the metro areas and the groups you refer to are actually quite present in spades.

Yes, no doubt similar to Ohio... I've lived in metro NE Ohio (in a very liberal college town and the Cleveland area) and in rural E. Ohio, which seems as about as scary conservative to me as the Deep South/Bible Belt.

[Croc]

You can buy any handgun in California as long as it is on some BS "safe" gun list.

You have to wait 10 days before receiving your firearm, which has done all of nothing to stem crime other than make people wait.

If you have the wrong stock on your rifle it is now an "assault weapon." Yes that's right, if i put on a collapsible stock on a rifle that has a detachable magazine, it is now magically an "assault rifle" even though its overall length well conforms to Federal Laws even while fully collapsed.

California has amongst the strictest gun laws of any state in the union, and they still have very high crime rates. It is not hard to argue that these laws are in violation of the 2nd Amendment.

California is NOT the most free and open state. If it were there would be fewer laws, more freedoms (less regulation). People would not be taxed at the 2nd or 3rd highest rates in the Union if it were truly the most free state (to pay for all the social welfare programs, which is still draining the money of the state even with high tax rates). Minimum wage laws would not be substantially higher than they are elsewhere (contributing to higher unemployment, higher inflation and more incentive to use illegal labor). Which cheats people from their freedom to get a job.

California is the most socialist state in the Union and its declining economy (on a global scale) as well as a large number of middle class people leaving the state is a clear indication that its policies have not worked very well (and the govornator is a RINO at best).

Freedom is not about telling you how to live your lives. Its about NOT telling you how to live your lives.

Being free and just in one area while being repressive and unjust in another area does not a free state make.

I'm sorry, but very little of this makes any sense. The social safety net is in place so people have the freedom to live in CA. Anyone hiring illegal labor is breaking the law, so your whole argument that the laws are incentivizing illegal labor is bunk. That's an enforcement issue, not a problem with the law. The minimum wage isn't higher than elsewhere, in fact CA isn't much above the federal level, and most certainly not at a "living" wage.

And you think everyone should have completely unbridled access to guns? Wow, I can't even respond to that. Sure, let's make it even easier for the crazies to get them and blow people up for cutting them off on the freeway. Or shooting up our schools. Yeah, that sounds like a righteous plan! Heaven forbid you have to wait 10 days to get your firearm...what's the hurry? Who or what do you need to shoot so immediately you cannot wait 10 days??

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

I'm sorry, but very little of this makes any sense. The social safety net is in place so people have the freedom to live in CA. Anyone hiring illegal labor is breaking the law, so your whole argument that the laws are incentivizing illegal labor is bunk. That's an enforcement issue, not a problem with the law. The minimum wage isn't higher than elsewhere, in fact CA isn't much above the federal level, and most certainly not at a "living" wage.

Of course it is breaking the law! California likes to not enforce the law in that regards. All i am am simply saying is that the minimum wage laws exacerbate the problem. Oh and California's minimum wage law was quite a bit higher than federal not but a few years ago.

If you are a US citizen, and for some reason you want to work out in the fields, you probably will not be able to because the farmer will be like, "im not going to pay you minimum wage" and then go and hire some illegal for far less. That is incentive.

As for a living wage, minimum wage will NEVER EVER EVER EVER become a living wage because inflation will quickly see to it that it is not . The whole minimum wage argument is extremely misguided and ineffective... other than for raising unemployment. Want a living wage? Get a better job. Go to school, there is money out there for you to be able to. Perhaps, oh i dont know, put away a little bit of money each paycheck for your children to go to school. I did not come from a wealthy family, but we did not have to resort to borrowing to send me to college because of good financial planning.

And you think everyone should have completely unbridled access to guns? Wow, I can't even respond to that. Sure, let's make it even easier for the crazies to get them and blow people up for cutting them off on the freeway. Or shooting up our schools. Yeah, that sounds like a righteous plan! Heaven forbid you have to wait 10 days to get your firearm...what's the hurry? Who or what do you need to shoot so immediately you cannot wait 10 days??

No, but inane laws that do nothing but restrict the freedom of law abiding citizens is not right (somehow having a pistol grip on your rifle makes it an assault weapon, even though its the SAME EXACT RIFLE WITHOUT IT). There is a difference between having a 5 minute background check (providing information on criminal records and mental illnesses) and waiting 10 days for no good reason other than to stop "hot heads" who would resort to some other method anyways.

besides, a CIA investigation has shown that gun laws are in general uncorrelated to crime rates. There is no benefit to having stricter gun laws, so why punish the law abiding people who would abide by the law anyways?

Fearmongering on this issue is pointless, the majority of American's do not favor stricter gun laws because they know they don't do any damn good. Criminals will always get their arms, law abiding people will abide by the law. Why strip them of their freedom when law breakers, will, by definition, break the law?

Besides, why do people pick on schools so much? Perhaps it is because these are gun free zones and they know full well that they will not meet any resistance here until the police show up.

Edited April 11, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Robert Hall]

<snip> besides, a CIA investigation has shown that gun laws are in general uncorrelated to crime rates. There is no benefit to having stricter gun laws, so why punish the law abiding people who would abide by the law anyways?

I don't believe that.. Canada has good gun laws and much less violent crime than the US, even taking into account the huge population difference. I've never understood the gun 'culture' in the US...I just don't see any reason (for someone not in law enforcement or the military) to own a gun.

Edited April 11, 2009 by moltar

[Croc]

I don't believe that.. Canada has good gun laws and much less violent crime than the US, even taking into account the huge population difference. I've never understood the gun 'culture' in the US...I just don't see any reason (for someone not in law enforcement or the military) to own a gun.

There is no reason. It is simply an impediment to maturity growth and letting cooler heads prevail. The longer the mentality exists that if you have a problem with someone it is OK to just shoot them, the longer this country will be in the &#036;h&#33;ter. That kind of thinking is uneducated and declasse.

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

I don't believe that.. Canada has good gun laws and much less violent crime than the US, even taking into account the huge population difference. I've never understood the gun 'culture' in the US...I just don't see any reason (for someone not in law enforcement or the military) to own a gun.

Simple, Canada is a different population than America. Even if no one had any guns at all America would still have more violence than Canada.

And as to Moltar. You greatly misunderstand the point of having weapons. It is self defense, sportsmanship, and fun. Guns are NOT to be used for revenge or simply to get back at someone who annoys you. Any LAW ABIDING GUN OWNER would not do any of these things.

Criminals on the other hand will do this weather it is with a gun or with some old fashion homemade explosives.

[Camino LS6]

I don't believe that.. Canada has good gun laws and much less violent crime than the US, even taking into account the huge population difference. I've never understood the gun 'culture' in the US...I just don't see any reason (for someone not in law enforcement or the military) to own a gun.

I wouldn't live in a country in which only law enforcement and the military have guns!

I'd run for the border as fast as possible.

[Oracle of Delphi]

I wouldn't live in a country in which only law enforcement and the military have guns!

I'd run for the border as fast as possible.

Which border?

Could I take pics of you running, it would make for great amusement for me?

[Camino LS6]

Which border?

Could I take pics of you running, it would make for great amusement for me?

That depends, do you have a gun?

[Oracle of Delphi]

That depends, do you have a gun?

Let me answer this way, I am an NRA member ...

[Camino LS6]

Well, if I'm running, we have already been disarmed. :AH-HA_wink:

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

I wouldn't live in a country in which only law enforcement and the military have guns!

I'd run for the border as fast as possible.

Well Mexico prohibits all private citizens from owning firearms. Canada only severely restricts it.

I'd try n move to Switzerland personally.

[Robert Hall]

I wouldn't live in a country in which only law enforcement and the military have guns!

I'd run for the border as fast as possible.

Well, in Mexico, the drug cartels have guns also.., lots of American assault rifles If I moved out of the US, I'd like go to either Canada (BC), New Zealand, Australia, the UK, France, or Italy.

Edited April 11, 2009 by moltar

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Well, in Mexico, the drug cartels have guns also.., lots of American assault rifles If I moved out of the US, I'd like go to either Canada (BC), New Zealand, Australia, the UK, France, or Italy.

You are correct my good sir! Those are US rifles manufactured for the US government and are marked FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ONLY.

Those weapons were sold/given to the Mexican army. Unfortunately the Mexican army has 1400 AWOLs ever month. Thats where they got most of their weapons.

[pow]

You are correct my good sir! Those are US rifles manufactured for the US government and are marked FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ONLY.

Those weapons were sold/given to the Mexican army. Unfortunately the Mexican army has 1400 AWOLs ever month. Thats where they got most of their weapons.

High-powered weapons seized from Mexican cartels were traced to gun dealers and shows in the US:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Story?id=4695848&page=2

Assault weapons made in China and Eastern Europe, resembling the AK-47, have become widely and cheaply available in the U.S. since Congress and the Bush administration refused to extend a ban on such weapons in 2004.

Under federal gun laws, gun dealers are not required to report multiple purchases of such weapons because they are classified as rifles.

"If you were to go into a gun store and buy 20 of these, there is no requirement by the gun dealer to fill out a multiple sales form," said the ATF's Newell.

The drug cartels' weapons of choice include variants of the AK-47, .50-caliber sniper rifles and a Belgian-made pistol called the "cop killer" or "mata policia" because of its ability to pierce a bulletproof vest.

"It's in high demand by your violent drug cartels, their assassins in Mexico," said Newell of the ATF. The gun can fire a high-powered round used in a rifle.

An ABC News investigation found the "mata policia" and a wide range of assault weapons prominently displayed at gun stores along the border in Texas, the state providing the most weapons to the drug cartels, according to the ATF.

Under Texas and federal law, there is no waiting period for the purchase of such weapons and no restriction on how many can be bought at a time.

U.S. officials say there is little they can do to go after licensed gun dealers because large purchases, dozens or hundreds at a time, are legal for U.S. citizens and legal immigrants with an INS green card unless a gun dealer suspects the purchase is being made for someone else.

ATF agents say legitimate gun dealers will often report suspicious activities, but that a small but significant number looks the other way.

"I have personally worked cases where gun dealers have willfully allowed hundreds of guns to leave their gun store knowing that they were going into the wrong hands," said Newell.

Edited April 11, 2009 by empowah

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

High-powered weapons seized from Mexican cartels were traced to gun dealers and shows in the US:

Yeah SOME of them were. The lot were from the Mexican army which are products of the US sold to them by the government and/or some other illegal means.

Besides why the hell would the drug cartel waste their own money buying semi-automatics from Texas when they can get the real deal cheaper off black markets? And why does the drug cartel exist in the first place?

Oh and as for the CIA report. I was mistaken, it was a study done by the NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES which found that "right to carry" laws have no effect. As in people are allowed to carry concealed with no permit or people are completely not allowed to carry.

I may have to read the rest of the report to see what else it said.

Additionally, please stop misrepresenting an AK-47 as a "high powered" rifle. Its a middle powered rifle at best (barely suitable to take down deer). Now a .50BMG is a high power rifle. And FYI, the 47 was still pervasive and cheap under Clinton as well. The only difference? No muzzle breaks or bayonet socket (cause we all know how those criminals like to use bayonets) i think they were also single stacks so they only held 10 rounds but i don't remember for sure (of course it takes all of 5-10 minutes to change the rifle to accept double stack "high capacity" mags).

Additionally the term "assault rifle" is a bunch of bunk because there are NO ASSAULT RIFLES SOLD LEGALLY IN THE US (unless its a class 3 weapon). a SEMI AUTOMATIC RIFLE, by DEFINITION IS NOT AN ASSAULT RIFLE. An assault rifle is select fire which means it can fire in semi auto, full auto, or perhaps 3 round burst. No new civilian rifles are full auto and therefore are not "assault rifles."

I am assuming the Belgium made "cop killa" is the FN 5-7 which shoots a round supposedly good at penetrating armor. The only problem is that the armor penetrating rounds are only sold to the military; not to the civilian population. I would not consider the bullet that the FN 5-7 shoots to be a "rifle" round although i think the P90 may shoot it, but that is a SMG/PDW.

So, yes the media like to exaggerate things and blow them way out of proportion, whats new?

Edited April 11, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

Don't mean to necropost, but i found a link to that FBI report saying that criminals ignore gun laws (hence making gun laws impede only law abiding peoples rights).

http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php/articl...entary/418.html

Its kinda really long and unfortunately Adobe can't search it... but its in there somewhere.

[Drew Dowdell]

Being free and just in one area while being repressive and unjust in another area does not a free state make.

Texas is not freer then California just because they only ban the things you don't care about anyway.

[Drew Dowdell]

BTW, yesterday was the first day it was officially legal for gays to get married in Iowa. There were a couple legislators running around trying to encourage county clerks to refuse to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. *shakes head* An elected official trying to tell public employees to break the law. I know it'll never happen, but I hope they get impeached.

[deftonesfan867]

This thread has gotten wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy off topic. Also I'm sick of the Texan bashing ffs.