Bill (William) Hogeland has just revisited an essay that he published about 10 years ago, in August of 2012.
He zeroes in on some of the same observations that come from the aforementioned Garrett Epps—my previous post in this thread—about what was in the mind of Founding Father James "Call me Jim" Madison and some of the other framers of the Constitution, when the Second Amendment was created.
There's a brief preface, under the heading "Ten Years On", followed by the original 2012 essay, and then what comes to his mind now, as he looks back on his 2012 essay. Like an appendix. "Notes from May 31, 202." That's not very long. Neither is the essay.
It was just a few days ago (Tuesday night) when Bill Hogeland had a brief (5 minutes, 30 seconds) conversation on air, about the Second Amendment. https://youtu.be/PJR0RNCpn-A
This is at the top of the "Bill Hogeland page":
quote
Hogeland’s first job after his morning paper route in South Brooklyn was playing five-string banjo in a steakhouse in Long Island, a position he held for three nights before being fired and starting work as a midtown-Manhattan foot messenger. Later employment included teaching literature, drywall and painting contracting, digital content strategy, and freelance writing for hire, including ad copy, tech manuals, video scripts, telephone customer-service scripts (it’s true!), bestselling ghostwritten books, thousands of liner notes for music reissues, and much, much more.
More importantly, to him: Hogeland writes his own books and essays, gives talks, and pursues other projects for print, stage, screen, and audio. He is best known as the author of the dissenting narrative-history trilogy of the U.S founding, Wild Early Republic — The Whiskey Rebellion (Simon and Schuster), Declaration (Simon and Schuster), and Autumn of the Black Snake (Farrar, Straus and Giroux) — as well as the expository work Founding Finance (University of Texas Press) and a collection of essays, Inventing American History (Boston Review Books/MIT Press). Yet he began his artistic career as a playwright and performer, with one-man shows at such venues as the Kitchen and Franklin Furnace and full-length plays staged-read and produced at the Williamstown Theater Festival and the Harold Clurman Theater.
Originally posted by Hudini: You [rinselberg] should really troll some place else. I will not give up my constitutional rights to you or anyone else.
If anything 2A-related were to be passed by Congress and signed into law by the President in the coming weeks (or months), an interesting aspect of it (at least for me) will be to see what this forum has to say about it.
Until that happens, I'm kind of just biding my time.
I'm pleased to offer the possibility of "perusals" of the writings of Garret Epps and William Hogeland, if only for the forum's lurkers, who may be looking on without revealing themselves in these conversations.
I'm pleased to offer the possibility, if only to offer the possibility.
If ever there was a "Red Flag"... I hope someone is reviewing this case, and trying to figure out whether NYPD could and should have taken preemptive action against the murderer, before the murder.
Queens residentt (age 51) has just been arrested and indicted for fatally shooting a deliveryman (age 45) for a Chinese restaurant.
The suspect (about to become a defendant) was reportedly angry about an incident, some months before the killing, in which he thought that the restaurant had shorted him on the duck sauce that was supposed to be part of his order. The restaurant tried to accommodate him with more duck sauce, but apparently, the "insult" was too much for the defendant to forget.
He kept on stewing [sic] about the incident and made several threats against the restaurant and its employees in the period from November, 2021, until May 1, when he allegedly shot and killed the restaurant's deliveryman.
The links are to the New York Times.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-04-2022).]
Elon Musk, a Second Amendment "squish" if there ever was one, has been drinking the socialist commie kool-aid on gun rights.
In the wake of the Uvalde atrocity, the world's most attention-grabbing CEO payed lip service to gun rights:
quote
“I strongly believe that the right to bear arms is an important safeguard against potential tyranny of government. Historically, maintaining their power over the people is why those in power did not allow public ownership of guns,”
But then he revealed his inner "gun grabber", ready to grab guns right out of the hands of many prospective retail purchasers:
quote
[Musk] supports “tight background checks” for all gun sales and limiting sales of assault weapons to people in special circumstances, like gun range owners, or people who live in a “high risk location, like gang warfare.”
"Assault rifles should at minimum require a special permit, where the recipient is extremely well vetted imo
"How about a middle ground, where the licensing standard for semi-auto rifles is a driver’s license, age 21 and no rap sheet?" Musk responded. "Basically, what is a reasonable way to make it harder for people with homicidal impulses to obtain body count maximizing weapons?"
In the wake of the Uvalde atrocity, the world's most attention-grabbing CEO payed lip service to gun rights: "Elon Musk ... "Assault rifles should at minimum require a special permit, where the recipient is extremely well vetted imo"
I'm sure you probably respect Elon more now.
I'll ignore the fact that term in his statement is purposely misused all the time.
The NFA, maybe ou have heard of it, the infringement that shouldnt have been, and didnt affect crime, already did that.
Like I said before, maybe you should begin at the beginning of this thread and review all the things you ignored.
If you use the term "assault weapon" and you are talking about semi-automatic rifles then you need to stop typing. You don't know what you are talking about and are parroting the anti-gun lobby. No one who owns and operates an AR-15 uses the term as it's a made up media term. BTW the AR stands for Armalite, the original manufacturer. The fully automatic version of any rifle already requires an extensive background check and $200 tax stamp issued by the BATFE.
The purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to give US citizens a fighting chance should our government become a tyrant. It's not for hunting or recreation.
New York's Governor Kathy Hochul signs "landmark" firearms-related legislation. A legislative package of 10 separate laws.
Raises minimum age from 18 (not any more) to 21 for purchase of semiautomatic rifles
Prohibits purchase of body armor (except for specified professional-related circumstances)
Intensifies the color saturation of so-called "Red Flag" orders, from Medium Red Metallic (not any more) to "Maroon Sky at Sunset
Enlarges upon the state's already existing Emergency Risk Protection Orders or "red flag" safeguards
The newly enacted legislation also levies more comprehensive reporting requirements on all New York state law enforcement agencies for creating crime reports, closes the "other gun" loophole (whatever that is), requires micro-stamping of semiautomatic pistols, eliminates the "grandfathering" of plus-sized and super-sized ammo clips and magazines (etc.), and tasks social media providers to "up their game" in terms of identifying and dealing with hostile or threatening online content.
The news just broke that the Senate has voted to debate the "bi-partisan" firearms-related legislation that's been drafted by a group of Democratic and Republican Senators.
Connecticut's U.S. Senator Chris Murphy talks about "gun trafficking" in relation to the new Safer Communities Act, which he thinks is going to be passed by the Senate in just a matter of 24 or 48 hours. https://youtu.be/fVM--ZH8wdU?t=270
Air date: June 22, 2022.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-22-2022).]
The boys in Australia cant even own a tooth-pick crossbow, New Zealand is lost, Britain has been a lost cause for a long time, Asian and some Middle-east places....dont even get me started
Resist the government of the day, stand up for your rights...
And you will be crushed, just like Trudeau does to us.....
I don't think there are all that many "rednecks" here in the U.S. that are going to be p*zzed off about this Safer Communities Act of 2022. They might have a preexisting p*zzed off condition, but I don't think this will worsen it, for any "redneck" that has already been diagnosed as P*zzed Off Positive.
Connecticut's U.S. Senator Chris Murphy talks about "gun trafficking" in relation to the new Safer Communities Act, which he thinks is going to be passed by the Senate in just a matter of 24 or 48 hours. https://youtu.be/fVM--ZH8wdU?t=270
Air date: June 22, 2022.
Chris Murphy (D) also said a week ago that these new laws were 'stepping stones' ('these new initial laws'). Can't remember exact wording, but didn't sit right with me. The specific wording he/she/it/they/them used. When I find the audio/text/video I'll post it. Travis/Sexton show had it.
In the end, they want your guns. There is no "the people" in the 2nd amendment, that's invisible ink to them. Only: ∆2030∆
The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that New York’s century-old concealed carry handgun law violated the Second Amendment, a finding long feared by local officials who viewed the law as a linchpin in efforts to curb the proliferation of pistols on New York City streets.
The 6 to 3 decision, which is the court’s most significant gun-rights ruling in more than a decade, voided the state’s Sullivan Act, a regulation that limited concealed carry handgun licenses to New Yorkers with specific defense needs.
Supreme Court strikes down New York concealed gun law in 6-3 decision [QUOTE]The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that New York’s century-old concealed carry handgun law violated the Second Amendment, a finding long feared by local officials who viewed the law as a linchpin in efforts to curb the proliferation of pistols on New York City streets.
The 6 to 3 decision, which is the court’s most significant gun-rights ruling in more than a decade, voided the state’s Sullivan Act, a regulation that limited concealed carry handgun licenses to New Yorkers with specific defense needs.
[/QUOTE]
Now the question is, what's a sensitive area..................
------------------ Rams
Isn't it strange that after a bombing, everyone blames the bomber, his upbringing, his environment, his culture, his mental state but … after a shooting, the problem is the gun.........
It's painfully obvious that some people think criminals give a damn about the laws and that the rest of us have no right to defend ourselves.
Removing law abiding citizen's rights to defensive measures will only result in more defenseless victims. It's amazing to me that the "Woke" won't wake up.
Anything specifically in the new Safer Communities Act that's not to like? Anything that raises a "red flag" (pun intended) in anyone's mind about this new federal legislation that looks like it will soon become law?
What restrictions? That a person who is 18 or older, but not yet 21, has to undergo a more complete version of the background check before being legally permitted to purchase a firearm?
As far as I'm aware, that's the only age-related distinction that becomes federal law if the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 20022 is enacted.
The federal government's idea of a background check is the Mueller investigation. All of that money, time and work found nothing, even though they are absolutely certain that Trump is a vicious criminal. Will they do a more thorough job on some kid from Kansas?
The federal government's idea of a background check is the Mueller investigation. All of that money, time and work found nothing, even though they are absolutely certain that Trump is a vicious criminal. Will they do a more thorough job on some kid from Kansas?
It's always that "pesky" United States Constitution that trips up dimwitted Leftists, especially at times like this when they can't contain their glee that some Americans might be unconstitutionally deprived of their rights.
This time it isn't the 2nd amendment.
This time it's the 14TH AMENDMENT and ironically and specifically the last 14 words of Section 1: "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
In short, the State cannot determine that a citizen has full legal standing as an adult and enjoy emancipation as well as suffrage at 18 years of age and then curtail that same citizens full right and protection of the laws, (including the 2nd amendment), by virtue of an arbitrary age restriction.
Like most all of the ill conceived laws driven principally by Leftists, this one will also not withstand the obvious oncoming SCOTUS challenge.
Leftists gotta Leftist
Especially via their legendary IGNORANCE...... of the U.S. Constitution
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 06-24-2022).]
Supreme Court strikes down New York concealed gun law in 6-3 decision [QUOTE]The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that New York’s century-old concealed carry handgun law violated the Second Amendment, a finding long feared by local officials who viewed the law as a linchpin in efforts to curb the proliferation of pistols on New York City streets.
The 6 to 3 decision, which is the court’s most significant gun-rights ruling in more than a decade, voided the state’s Sullivan Act, a regulation that limited concealed carry handgun licenses to New Yorkers with specific defense needs.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, YES, YES!
“Today’s Supreme Court decision may have opened an additional river that is going to feed the sea of gun violence in our city and in our nation,” Adams said in a news conference at City Hall."
I guarantee you crime will go down as it has in other places with less restrictions on law abiding citizens. Criminals don't like to be where people shoot back. Some will look for another line of work.
Originally posted by williegoat: The federal government's idea of a background check is the Mueller investigation. All of that money, time and work found nothing, even though they are absolutely certain that Trump is a vicious criminal. Will they do a more thorough job on some kid from Kansas?
It's a disservice to history for anyone to "diss" the Mueller investigation as if it were nothing more than an effort to impeach or indict President Trump that did not, in the end, bring about that result.
The Mueller investigation is like one of those kitchen marvels. It slices and dices. It turns fresh-picked fruits into wholesome fruit salads and raw vegetables into delicious, anti-oxidant rich smoothies. And it does this:
It's a disservice to history for anyone to "diss" the Mueller investigation as if it were nothing more than an effort to impeach or indict President Trump that did not, in the end, bring about that result.
It's a fact of history that the Mueller investigation was nothing more than an effort to impeach or indict President Trump that did not, in the end, bring about that result.
Originally posted by 2.5: FACT... every criminal dictator on the planet agrees, you are an easer target when you cant shoot back....
Is there anything in the new legislation that the President just signed into law that "2.5" would like to single out for his disapproval, or his approval? It's been designated as the "Bipartisan Safer Communities Act of 2022."
That is the question that come to my mind when I read that remark from "2.5".
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 06-29-2022).]
