Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on February 13, 2019, 01:11:21 PM

Title: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: Ben on February 13, 2019, 01:11:21 PM
LA city council passes law that you must disclose "ties" to the NRA if applying for any city contracts.

I'll be curious to see how this might hold up in court. Though I'm not sure anyone will take trouble to go to court (outside of maybe the NRA). Note that Los Angeles forbids asking prospective employees if they have a criminal history.

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2019/02/13/2a-alert-cam-edwards-and-others-hammer-progressive-priorities-after-l-a-passes-law-about-disclosing-nra-ties/
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: MechAg94 on February 13, 2019, 03:16:56 PM
Weren't there already court precedents about memberships in organizations? 
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: WLJ on February 13, 2019, 03:40:15 PM
I lost my NRA membership card in a boating accident.
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: TechMan on February 13, 2019, 05:00:40 PM
Don't worry the Typhus outbreak will probably get the city council first.
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: zxcvbob on February 13, 2019, 05:58:28 PM
Wouldn't that be a Bill of Attainder?  (unconstitutional)
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: 230RN on February 14, 2019, 06:08:39 AM
Wouldn't that be a Bill of Attainder?  (unconstitutional)

So say you.

So say I.

But it's constitutional until a court says it isn't.

One of the biggest problems in this country is that the founders assumed legislators would look at the constitution first before proposing a law.

The other biggest problem is the founders assumed that lawmakers would be honorable men and would take their oaths of office seriously.

Unfortunately, somewhere along the way politics got to be an industry instead of a calling.

There.  I said it and I ain't takin' it back.

Terry, 230RN
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: MechAg94 on February 14, 2019, 08:44:10 AM
So say you.

So say I.

But it's constitutional until a court says it isn't.

One of the biggest problems in this country is that the founders assumed legislators would look at the constitution first before proposing a law.

The other biggest problem is the founders assumed that lawmakers would be honorable men and would take their oaths of office seriously.

Unfortunately, somewhere along the way politics got to be an industry instead of a calling.

There.  I said it and I ain't takin' it back.

Terry, 230RN
I think they assumed the people would rebel again if those things happened. 
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: TommyGunn on February 14, 2019, 12:12:20 PM
So say you.

So say I.

But it's constitutional until a court says it isn't.

One of the biggest problems in this country is that the founders assumed legislators would look at the constitution first before proposing a law.

The other biggest problem is the founders assumed that lawmakers would be honorable men and would take their oaths of office seriously.

Unfortunately, somewhere along the way politics got to be an industry instead of a calling.

There.  I said it and I ain't takin' it back.

Terry, 230RN

If all laws made were presumptive UNCONSTITUTIONAL from the start,  can you imagine what the court system would be like?

And .... still no gaurantee our legislatures would care about the Constitution.
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: 230RN on February 15, 2019, 03:19:07 AM
TommyGunn remarked,

Quote
If all laws made were presumptively UNCONSTITUTIONAL from the start,  can you imagine what the court system would be like?


An interesting concept.  I think I'll mull that one over for a while.

I've suggested for decades that all laws have to have an expiration date, and that two have to be repealed for another to pass, but that's an interesting twist, so thank you, TommyGunn.

However, we must keep in mind that it is the essential function of any government of any form whatsoever, to progressively limit freedoms.

Terry, 230RN

Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: HankB on February 15, 2019, 06:43:59 AM
. . . Note that Los Angeles forbids asking prospective employees if they have a criminal history. . .
Would that include people applying for a job as the salesman at a sporting goods retailer's gun counter?

Or as a clerk in a pharmacy that stocks opioids and such?

What about bank tellers? Security guards? Police, fire, EMS, teachers, day care workers?

 :facepalm:
Title: Re: NRA and Los Angeles
Post by: Ben on December 12, 2019, 09:44:45 AM
Necro:

So a judge has blocked this in LA.

Perplexing side note: The article mentioned that the NRA apparently dropped a lawsuit against San Francisco regarding labeling the NRA as a "domestic terror organization". One would think that would be at least as valid a lawsuit as the one on LA.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/judge-blocks-los-angeles-law-requiring-city-contractors-to-disclose-nra-ties