We need a melting snowflake emotion

He's accurate. You are insulting James.

Yes, he's an Angel.

why does it always have to be about James?

You did that dirt!

Not me

All I said was he don't trap. I doubt he ever trapped much and he just was attempting to sell all his traps, so probably can't trap with no traps.

It's not James fault.

It's just that he knows nothing about which political party is for and which one is against our gun and outdoor life. Knowing that, it's also not his fault that the questions he asks are asked in the manner that leads us to believe he is against our ways.

I see i should give him more compassion seeing his lack of understanding.

(in my defense, he's been asking these questions for the 8 years i've been here. I'd think it would soon sink in.)

you're pretty adept at ignoring points that logically go against your viewpoints.

you want an example, you say? you railed against Kavanaugh's perceived indifference to precedents, but when I asked you about the one set in the internment of Japanese Americans (Roosevelt's stacked Supreme Court); there was dead silence.

M-O-P-E-D

Don't feel singled out. I usually get so many responses that I can't address them all, not without more time here than I'm willing to spend. If you were rude or insulting, odds are good I ignored you, since it's so much more pleasant to talk to people who are courteous and respectful.

I don't recall the post you're talking about, but if you explain what Kavanaugh has to do with the Japanese internment decision, I'll ponder it.

Jim

I was not rude to you...I asked you a question. but I was wrong that the post was about Kavanaugh...it was the SCOTUS decision re: union fair share extortion...

Originally Posted By: James
The SCOTUS decision is surprising mainly because the majority were so willing to over-rule established precedent yet again... Is that what you people want?


"so...On Dec. 18, 1944, the Supreme Court ruled in Korematsu v. United States that the wartime internment of Japanese-Americans was constitutional.

do you NOT want SCOTUS to be able to over-rule established precedent?" white marlin

Good evening James

No

Your not being rude. Your being real!

James is a liberal. They make things personal!

Either ignore him or poke back. But don't feel bad nor try to argue with emotion (real or fake).

They actually have a play book.

And it don't involve facts, logic, or reason!

i wish the r's would keep their word and make carry national. as I said, big boon to trappers. some states you have to unload your fire arm before you get in a vehicle. every time. what a royal pain and ridiculous waste of le time to check that nonsense. time we have to pay for. what an enormous waste of a trappers time. unloading firearm, ( in fact not just unloading but removing ALL ammo from the gun, not just the chamber) securing ammo and firearm separately, every time you want to drive a quarter mile. time to change that ridiculous overburdening and illegal law

I'm not sure how to respond because you haven't quoted me in full context. You've left out some of my words, and I don't know what posts I was responding to. I don't know if that might make a difference, but I'll take a stab at it.

Korematsu is considered a shameful decision by legal historians, almost as bad as Dred Scott. I was taught in law school that Korematsu wouldn't likely be considered precedent by any future court.

I was thinking (I THINK I was thinking, but again, there's a lack of context) more of cases like Citizen's United, which over-ruled long established precedent in the campaign funding issues.

There's a difference between asking a question and staking out a position. I actually want a court willing to over-rule bad precedent--bad, in my opinion. lol. Like you, probably.

Jim

There you go, talking about me again.

Jim

here's a link to that thread...

https://trapperman.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/6271336/1



Of COURSE it was a bad decision!



why is that decision not a precendent, but Roe is?



not sure what you mean by that, or why it might matter...



at least you're being honest, now.

I hope this meets James's criteria, if it were not for Republican assertiveness,a lot Mn would have lost
snaring this past session.

True.
Wi has done away with a lot of these stupid laws in the past several years.