jbird

Lol oh no someone doesn't like it when other religions are included.

No twitter or facebook back then. I wonder how much social media and major news networks play in this.

This former soldier has no problems with it. Especially when you consider other languages are being used as well. I like learning and appreciating other cultures and language falls under that. FYI allah means god.

I moved on from that part. LIPTON BASH showed that the supreme court ruled in favor of people's right to having a loaded gun. I said that pertains to them as individuals with accordance to the 2nd amendment, not with fostering a child which is not a right.

Everything you mentioned has nothing to do with foster care and the state laws put down by Nevada in regards to foster care with fire arms and ammo. Those are separate issues you can make a different thread on.

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.

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.

When it pertains to the individual, not foster care, which is not a right.

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.

It clearly states that for an individual, not for meeting the requirements of foster care. Fostering a child is a choice, not a right.

That right is not being fringed upon

Is that stated in the constitution?

Their right according to state law, just disqualifies them from fostering children.

None of the situations you wrote down have anything to do with this case. They are not being forced by the government to give up their 2nd amendment rights in order to foster children. The 2nd amendment is not unlimited. If the government is not taking their guns away, no rights are being fringed upon.

To you maybe, not according to the state of Nevada and other people on here. To infringe is to mean they are being prevented to having a loaded gun in the first place. Not the case.

Nothing is being infringed upon. If keeping a loaded gun is permitted, so be it. If that conflicts with foster care, then they fail to meet the requirement.

Not in the case of foster care. They fail to meet the requirement.

What right are they giving up?

The existence of the 15th, 19th and 26th amendments, which prohibit discrimination based on race, gender and age, implies there is no explicit right to vote in the Constitution. Nothing is said about mandated ID.

Once again, the state laws require that the ammo and weapons be stored and separated. The family failed to meet this and got denied.

Nevada Firearm Laws Foster Parenting NAC 424.600 Requires that weapons are unloaded at all times when children are in the home. Requires that weapons are stored in locked containers or rooms out of the reach of children or made inoperable. Requires that ammunition and arrows are stored in separate locked containers. Requires that weapons shall not be transported in the same vehicle in which children are riding unless the weapons are made inoperable and inaccessible. None. Per NRS 424.020 all licensed foster homes must adhere to the standards adopted by the Division of Child and Family Services. (NOTE: Questionable Authority under NRS 424.020 exists for the division to make this regulation. This laws give authority to the division to "establish reasonable minimum standards for" foster homes and "prescribe rules for the regulation" of foster homes, but there is no specific statute allowing for the division to regulate firearms. )

False, nothing is being limited. The 2nd amendment talks about the right to bear arms. It talks nothing about the secured separation of ammo and weapons that are mandated by the states, in this case Nevada, which is protected under the 10th amendment. The 10th amendment states that anything not delegated in the constitution or prohibited to the states is reserved to the states. I see nothing prohibiting the states from regulating fire arms and ammo by keeping them secured and separated. So in this case, the foster care program controlled by the state is not wrong.

As one person already said, there are limits to our rights. In this case, the couple failed to meet the requirement mandated by the foster care about separation of ammo and guns. That is not discrimination, that is simply saying you do not meet our standards.

Not a crime, but fails to meet the regulations of a foster care program.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that will not be happening to appease one couple that failed to meet the requirements. If they can't meet them, no kids to foster. It's that simple.