March 9, 201511 yr Are you saying that keeping a loaded gun in your house isn't a right ? Your not serious right ? You realize bullets are apart of the right ? I hope you know this. Is that stated in the constitution?
March 9, 201511 yr Ukm you realize the supreme court ruled in the District of Columbia vs Heller just recently ruled the ability to keep a loaded firearm in your home is a constitutional right for all non felons. So again yes a right is being infringed as ruled by the Supreme Court.
March 9, 201511 yr It clearly states that for an individual, not for meeting the requirements of foster care. Fostering a child is a choice, not a right.
March 9, 201511 yr That right is not being fringed upon We disagree we are just talking circles. I believe a government restricting the access to a government program based solely on exercising a constitutional right , I find it to be infringement . For some reason some of you don't. I don't get it but I'm not here to convince you . I just think your wrong.
March 9, 201511 yr We disagree we are just talking circles. I believe a government restricting the access to a government program based solely on exercising a constitutional right , I find it to be infringement . For some reason some of you don't. I don't get it but I'm not here to convince you . I just think your wrong. The constitution or D.C. vs. heller didn't mention foster care. There is no mention of this and because of that the state of Nevada has the power to established a rule on separation of ammo and weapon for foster KIDS.
March 9, 201511 yr That right is not being fringed upon If the Supreme Court ruled it is a right to keep a loaded gun in your house, then a right is being infringed upon by the state of Nevada. Granted, this couple will have to file a brief and take it through the court system. The Supreme Court set a precedent. If they ruled a right is a right in D.C. it is also a right in Nevada.
March 9, 201511 yr If the Supreme Court ruled it is a right to keep a loaded gun in your house, then a right is being infringed upon by the state of Nevada. Granted, this couple will have to file a brief and take it through the court system. The Supreme Court set a precedent. If they ruled a right is a right in D.C. it is also a right in Nevada. When it pertains to the individual, not foster care, which is not a right.
March 9, 201511 yr We disagree we are just talking circles. I believe a government restricting the access to a government program based solely on exercising a constitutional right , I find it to be infringement . For some reason some of you don't. I don't get it but I'm not here to convince you . I just think your wrong. No big deal. We think you're just as wrong. It happens.
March 9, 201511 yr As foster children are in the primary custody and care of the State (chose any of 48 with the same regulations), the State has the legal right to determine the requirements of their placement. Their pimary concern has to be the safety of those children Given the circumstances that precipitates the removal of a child from their familial situation, yes...I am just fine if, in this case, the rights of a gun owner come second to the responsibility of the State.
March 9, 201511 yr When it pertains to the individual, not foster care, which is not a right. They are individuals. Let's face it, we just disagree. Period. It does fascinate me how those that champion other civil liberties do an about face when it comes to gun ownership. Has it ever occurred to those that are championing this Draconian regulation that if a person is found responsible enough to foster or adopt children, they are responsible enough to have a loaded gun in the house? As an adoptive parent, I find many statements made in this thread, let's just say they leave me scratching my head.
March 9, 201511 yr They are individuals. Let's face it, we just disagree. Period. It does fascinate me how those that champion other civil liberties do an about face when it comes to gun ownership. Has it ever occurred to those that are championing this Draconian regulation that if a person is found responsible enough to foster or adopt children, they are responsible enough to have a loaded gun in the house? As an adoptive parent, I find many statements made in this thread, let's just say they leave me scratching my head. Probably because people hold certain civil rights higher than others. Also, they did find these people not responsible enough because these people failed to meet the state's requirement of separating ammo and guns. Period.
March 9, 201511 yr Probably because people hold certain civil rights higher than others. Also, they did find these people not responsible enough because these people failed to meet the state's requirement of separating ammo and guns. Period. ALL civil liberties are equal. Check the U.S. Constitution. Gee, guess they should not have let me adopt. I come home, with my firearm I carry to protect people with all day, to my adoptive children. You really need to get a grip on who is responsible and who is not. Period.
March 9, 201511 yr ALL civil liberties are equal. Check the U.S. Constitution. Gee, guess they should not have let me adopt. I come home, with my firearm I carry to protect people with all day, to my adoptive children. You really need to get a grip on who is responsible and who is not. Period. How about check your post. "It does fascinate me how those that champion other civil liberties do an about face when it comes to gun ownership." You are correct, all civil rights are equal under the constitution. However, they are not equal under human opinion. That is why people hold certain rights in higher regards to others. Also the only person who needs to get a grip is you. Particularly with NEVADA state law when it pertains to foster care. Period.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.