Skip to comments.
Daley rips Supreme Court on handgun ban stance(Extreme Barf Alert)
The Chicago Sun-Times ^
| March 3, 2010
| Fran Spielman
Posted on 03/03/2010 3:12:39 PM PST by lex33
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 next last
1
posted on
03/03/2010 3:12:39 PM PST
by
lex33
To: lex33
Daley “ SHOOTS” his mouth off enough. He doesn’t need a weapon .
2
posted on
03/03/2010 3:14:07 PM PST
by
Renegade
("Bring it on while I still don't need glasses to shoot your eye out ")
To: lex33
Turn 6, already. Seriously.
To: lex33
Hey, Daley the Constitution is the law of land. You will either live by it or die by it as an enemy of it.
4
posted on
03/03/2010 3:15:28 PM PST
by
DarthVader
(Liberalism is the politics of EVIL whose time of judgment has come.)
To: lex33
"What I say or do in Chicago goes - I don't need no Supreme Court telling me how to run things"
5
posted on
03/03/2010 3:17:37 PM PST
by
SkyDancer
(If you don't read the newspaper you are uninformed, if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed)
To: lex33
To: lex33
The D.C. Council subsequently replaced its overturned law with new regulations that require gun owners to receive five hours of safety training, register their firearms every three years and face criminal background checks every six years. And yet the homicide rate has dropped by about 25% since DC's gun laws were over turned.
I thought there was going to be blood in the streets!?! /sarc
7
posted on
03/03/2010 3:17:58 PM PST
by
bayliving
(What are YOU prepared to sacrifice in order to preserve freedom?)
To: DarthVader
So Daley hasn’t had armed security for decades?
DK
To: SkyDancer
This ain’t 1968 and this punk isn’t his old man.
9
posted on
03/03/2010 3:18:45 PM PST
by
Joe Boucher
(Just say NO to RINOs.)
To: lex33
Why didn’t a reporter ask Daily, if his current gun law is so good, why does the city have the highest murder rate in the country?
To: lex33
To: lex33
He can’t go to ANY court and wear his gun. And you can bet that A HOLE either has one of is surrounded by body guards that are all armed. I bet you can’t even get to his office carrying.
To: lex33
The Chicago mob doesn’t seem to like the idea of just plain folks being able to shoot back!
13
posted on
03/03/2010 3:20:20 PM PST
by
Bigun
("It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere." Voltaire)
To: lex33
“If a gun is so important to us on the street or someones home, why cant I go to the Supreme Court and sit there with a gun?”
You don’t have to...you hire six thugs to do it...you bastard.
14
posted on
03/03/2010 3:20:31 PM PST
by
jessduntno
(They'll get my false teeth when they pry them from my sister's cold, dead mouth!)
To: bayliving
I was going to ask, but you already supplied the answer.
Yes, “scary” that they allowed private citizens to defend themselves in D.C.; and the result was a predictable drop in the homicide rate by about 25%.
15
posted on
03/03/2010 3:21:38 PM PST
by
allmendream
(Income is EARNED not distributed. So how could it be re-distributed?)
To: lex33
To: Dark Knight
The only reason these fascists are crowing like this because they that their tyranny is going to be crushed by the armed citizen whom they will not be able to argue with. They are outnumbered and outgunned.
17
posted on
03/03/2010 3:21:49 PM PST
by
DarthVader
(Liberalism is the politics of EVIL whose time of judgment has come.)
To: lex33
We assassinated President John F. Kennedy. We assassinated Martin Luther King. And we assassinated Robert F. Kennedy No "we" didn't.
18
posted on
03/03/2010 3:23:33 PM PST
by
Huck
(Q: How can you tell a party is in the majority? A: They're complaining about the fillibuster.)
To: lex33
Maybe Daley is going to take a page from Andrew Jackson’s playbook. When told the Supreme Court had overturned one of his policies he asked, “How many soldiers does Chief Justice Marshall have?”
19
posted on
03/03/2010 3:24:52 PM PST
by
CholeraJoe
(Schrodinger's Hat - Simultaneously on your head and off.)
To: lex33
I’ve read a few articles saying the court was “signaling”...
but short on specifics.
The best way to sum it up I guess is to say that cities, etc have the OPTION to regulate.
But under no circumstances can the word “regulate” translate in to “ban”.
20
posted on
03/03/2010 3:27:36 PM PST
by
djf
(Who says "The stuff of life" is not stuff? Mostly it's people who have the most stuff.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-69 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson