521
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A 14-year-old boy allegedly fatally shot his older sister in Florida after a family argument over Christmas presents, officials said Tuesday.

The teen had been out shopping on Christmas Eve with Abrielle Baldwin, his 23-year-old sister, as well as his mother, 15-year-old brother and sister's children, Pinellas County Sheriff Bob Gualtieri said during a news conference.

The teenage brothers got into an argument about who was getting more Christmas presents.

"They had this family spat about who was getting what and what money was being spent on who, and they were having this big thing going on in this store," Gualtieri said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The second amendment refers to a well regulated militia and bearing arms. It gives the right to possess guns by militia members.

The Second Amendment also states its purpose expressly: to protect the security of the state. If the "let everyone have whatever guns" approach is a threat to state security, then obviously that approach isn't protected by the Second Amendment.

Your version of the Second Amendment is a right-wing lie, not borne out by law books, history books, or dictionaries.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Again, rendered irrelevant by the Supreme Court rulings in Heller and McDonald:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53."

Further, they explain their reasoning:

"As we will describe below, the “militia” in colonial America consisted of a subset of “the people”—those who were male, able bodied, and within a certain age range. Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people.”"

This reading is pretty obvious when you look at the text of the 2nd Amendment:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, not the right of the MILITIA to keep and bear arms.

[-] JustZ@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Yes, this is a radical supreme court that is ignoring 200 years of president. In order to come up with these bullshit rulings. They aren't going to last more than a couple of decades.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

We should hope so, but then it took 50 years to overturn Roe... so...

Right now, the court is 6-3 conservative.

If Biden wins in '24 and the Dems win again in '28, that gives a solid chance at replacing Thomas and Alito. Thomas is 75, Alito is 73. So 84 and 82 by 2032.

That would flip the court 5-4 liberal.

But the next 3 after that are Roberts, Sotomayor and Kagan. Roberts has been somewhat of a check on the crazier judges, losing these three under a Republican President would lock in Conservative rule for the better part of a century.

this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
521 points (97.3% liked)

News

23397 readers
1652 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS