Gun control

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
What's up with high school history teachers that they no longer educate their students on the Bill of Rights?

Beatoff says he'd take our guns by force.
A TX state rep replies, “My AR is ready for you Robert Francis”
Beta starts sobbing "DEATH THREAT!!! AAAAAAHHHHHHHH!" and his mindless bots proceed to lose their hivemind as well.

?

This is what the 2nd Amendment was specifically created for: when a fascist government tries to subjugate We the People, we can fight back. It's #2, to protect #1.

I find it stunning that so many are ignorant of their rights in this country, and why those things are specifically stated in our Constitution.
 

transporter

Well-Known Member
Just to point out the stunningly obvious:

The Constitution does NOT "specifically state" that you have a right to own an AR15.

And the point out the even more stunningly obvious:

Beto O'Rourke isn't going to win the nomination. Neither is Castro. Why do you give a sh!t what they say?

Bernie Sanders is the scary option among the top tier candidates...Warren next concerning...Biden is the least worrisome from a policy point of view.

And Trump, well he is just a buffoon who relies of the support of those like you--too stupid to actually look anything up or so blinded by their resources and desperate to self-rationalize their vote that they can't tell facts from propaganda.
 

Smokey1

Active Member
Thank goodness I had an excellent social studies teacher in Middle School who taught us all about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and what it all meant and why. Too bad there seems to be few of those teachers left in the systems.
 

Chris0nllyn

Well-Known Member
Just to point out the stunningly obvious:

The Constitution does NOT "specifically state" that you have a right to own an AR15.

And the point out the even more stunningly obvious:

Beto O'Rourke isn't going to win the nomination. Neither is Castro. Why do you give a sh!t what they say?

Bernie Sanders is the scary option among the top tier candidates...Warren next concerning...Biden is the least worrisome from a policy point of view.

And Trump, well he is just a buffoon who relies of the support of those like you--too stupid to actually look anything up or so blinded by their resources and desperate to self-rationalize their vote that they can't tell facts from propaganda.
The Constitution doesn't "specifically state" that you have a right to 4A protections of your cell phone either, but SCOTUS has ruled that one does. SCOTUS has also ruled that we may own weapons in common use at the time. In our case, there are approximately 5-10 MILLION AR-15s in this country in the hands of civilians.

Should one wait for a candidate to become elected before criticising their own words? If anything, it possibly gives someone who feels strongly about gun rights reason NOT to vote for Beto.
 

black dog

Free America
PREMO Member
Just to point out the stunningly obvious:

The Constitution does NOT "specifically state" that you have a right to own an AR15.

And the point out the even more stunningly obvious:

Beto O'Rourke isn't going to win the nomination. Neither is Castro. Why do you give a sh!t what they say?

Bernie Sanders is the scary option among the top tier candidates...Warren next concerning...Biden is the least worrisome from a policy point of view.

And Trump, well he is just a buffoon who relies of the support of those like you--too stupid to actually look anything up or so blinded by their resources and desperate to self-rationalize their vote that they can't tell facts from propaganda.

Apparently you don't understand " Shall Not Infringe "

Now take one of your big fat Crayola's and write it on your grams living room wall a thousand times.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
You'd think that phrase would make it "Stunningly Obvious!"
Well, you know...the progs speak in codes and dog whistles, so plain English isn't something they comprehend.

I just thought it was hilarious that Betafascistwannabe threatens to disarm and subjugate the citizenry; gets reminded of exactly why that 2A is in there; and starts crying about being threatened.

:roflmao:

Of course, it's not so hilarious how many of We the People are ****ing braindead stupid....
 

Hijinx

Well-Known Member
Beatoff and the other fascists running for President know about the 2nd. Amendment,
But he and the others have every intention of changing it.
They mean to take these rights a little piece at a time and they are hoping no one will fight for their freedoms

They may get a surprise.
 

Kyle

Just being a fly in the ointment...
PREMO Member
Beatoff and the other fascists running for President know about the 2nd. Amendment,
But he and the others have every intention of changing it.
They mean to take these rights a little piece at a time and they are hoping no one will fight for their freedoms

They may get a surprise.
"Regulate until it's meaningless!" was the Democrat plan 35 years ago.

It hasn't changed.
 
Reactions: BOP

kom526

They call me ... Sarcasmo
Well, you know...the progs speak in codes and dog whistles, so plain English isn't something they comprehend.

I just thought it was hilarious that Betafascistwannabe threatens to disarm and subjugate the citizenry; gets reminded of exactly why that 2A is in there; and starts crying about being threatened.

:roflmao:

Of course, it's not so hilarious how many of We the People are ****ing braindead stupid....
@Jack is on it and they have removed the original tweet ... of course.
 

BernieP

Resident PIA
The Constitution doesn't "specifically state" that you have a right to 4A protections of your cell phone either, but SCOTUS has ruled that one does. SCOTUS has also ruled that we may own weapons in common use at the time. In our case, there are approximately 5-10 MILLION AR-15s in this country in the hands of civilians.

Should one wait for a candidate to become elected before criticising their own words? If anything, it possibly gives someone who feels strongly about gun rights reason NOT to vote for Beto.
Unfortunately you need two things to get a case to the SCOTUS, money, lots of it and standing.
For example, the new "feel good because we will all be safer with..." red flag laws.
Basically if someone tells authorities that you have firearms and you are a threat, they can come and take your weapons.
You do not get a hearing in advance, the right to face your accuser or a trial by a jury of your peers, it's an administrative decision that you present an imminent threat.
So to challenge this law you would have to have your weapons seized by law enforcement.
Then you would have to hire an attorney to go to court. Some how you would have to move the case to federal court to challenge the law itself.
You, the individual, will be suing the deep pockets of the state.
Because the NRA has traditionally taken on such cases, the NRA has found itself under attack via it's corporate partners and sponsors.
Those in favor of more control are looking to dry up the money. It's the same technique being used to silence opposition in the media, attack their sponsors to shut them down.

But not to worry, there may be a fast track to litigate Red Flag laws - if you have family that cares.
When your door is kicked in at 5AM, just pick up a gun, that way you can be shot, even if you drop the gun.
Your survivors now have standing to file suit.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
The Constitution does NOT "specifically state" that you have a right to own an AR15.
And, it doesn't specifically state muskets, either.

See, they were smart men, and realized that if there were multi-shot weapons back then, there'd probably be more technology later. That's why they said, "arms", not "muskets" or AR15.

In short, the argument you are making makes no sense.

Beto O'Rourke isn't going to win the nomination. Neither is Castro. Why do you give a sh!t what they say?
Seems a great way to ensure they are not going to win the nomination.

Bernie Sanders is the scary option among the top tier candidates...Warren next concerning...Biden is the least worrisome from a policy point of view.
To be frank, if you are upset with Trump changing policies so often, you'd be apoplectic with Biden. He can't seem to keep track of a policy point for more than a day or two. Meanwhile, the policies he DOES bounce back and forth between are mostly bad.
 

MiddleGround

Well-Known Member
Since the terms "Shall not be infringed" seem to be specifically stated and defined.....

Can someone specifically define the term "arms?"

:oldman:
 
Top