1919 A4 Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

· Mouse Machine Works
Joined
·
1,681 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
I agree, Phal. The Left will find this an ideal time to wind up a few nuts and point them at crowds. Happens far too often when it's "convenient". Libtards don't want us armed. It threatens their ability to control us.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,334 Posts
I'm reading the court thinking this way. Most of the Justices agree that gun ownership is an individual right. So far, so good. Now for the hook. It is possible that the majority will seek to put conditions on ownership, say in dangerous neighborhoods. This would go along the same thought's of the Solicitor General. Then we are back to what we have today.
A moderate judge will be the swing vote.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts
I'm reading the court thinking this way. Most of the Justices agree that gun ownership is an individual right. So far, so good. Now for the hook. It is possible that the majority will seek to put conditions on ownership, say in dangerous neighborhoods. This would go along the same thought's of the Solicitor General. Then we are back to what we have today.
A moderate judge will be the swing vote.

Yes that is what I thought too. They seemed to argue that the 2nd protects right to own arms, but it doesn't say what restrictions can be put on them. Meaning states with higher crime would have higher restrictions. But the funny thing is, look at the state that this lawsuit is actually after, DC has one of the most restrictive gun laws in effect but its one of the most dangerous states to live in. The argument to put more restrictions on firearms in "higher danger" areas is laughable at best, but I bet it will be pushed. Jeez after all this is about self defense right? Higher crime should equal a higher capacity to protect ones self. :rolleyes: But then again common sense does not prevail amongst the gun grabbers.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
I'm reading the court thinking this way. Most of the Justices agree that gun ownership is an individual right. So far, so good. Now for the hook. It is possible that the majority will seek to put conditions on ownership, say in dangerous neighborhoods. This would go along the same thought's of the Solicitor General. Then we are back to what we have today.
A moderate judge will be the swing vote.

Two of the lefties "questions"

---Justice Breyer urged the Court to look at the purpose of the DC law. In light of the 80,000 to 100,000 people killed every year by handguns, why can’t cities act to keep streets safer and ban them? “Does this case not hinge on whether it’s reasonable to ban handguns, while leaving you free to own other weapons?” he asked the lawyer opposing the ban.

---Justice Ginsburg was focused on what restrictions were permissible. Bans on machine guns? Licensing requirements? Trigger locks?



These two are retards. Where the hell did Breyer get 100,00 handgun deaths?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
2ndShooter ,is on to something there.
The guys on the night shift emailed me saying that they were watching Fox last night and some air head was talking about the guns that would be permissible.
Certain revolvers with approved safety slugs ,in other words , you would be better off with a cross bow.
No semis , and the gun couldn't leave your home.
I have been watching S&W ,they have released the Model 27 again ,this time is is an 8 shot , Locking device , recommended to use 38sp .
It and the 19 have always been one of my favorites, but this thing is expensive ,PC, and Gen. Patton would be turning in his grave.
We cant blame the gun makers ,they are there to sell guns and you watch ,they all will be offering this type weapon soon.
What i don't understand is what part of ( Shall NOT be infringed ) don't they understand ?
One Liberal even said (fine ,then civilians should be armed with the guns of the era that the 2nd was referring to ).
I fear this is going to open a Pandora's box on gun ownership.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
919 Posts
Seems to me if they out law breaking and entering as well as murder the issue of gun control to prevent violence would be moot. If the supreme court acted on that they could go home tomorow and skip all the drama.

I was listening to the radio on the way home from work and they were talking about the national parks and concealed weapons. Park Ranger though it'd be scary if everybody was packing firearms in the parks, citing campsite squabbles as a potential flashpoint for gun violence.

I wonder if he fears for his life if he goes to a shooting range? You'd think a gun range would be a prime place for gun violence given that pretty much everybody has a loaded gun in their hands.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
3,274 Posts
2nd ,where the hell did the Lawyer on our side come up with a plastic (clock)?
Or the stooge last night come up with an AR47 ? from the Brady Bunch.
These people don't even know what they are talking about !!!
This is not a victory Brothers ,this is a compromise ,with an attempt to water down the 2nd Amendment.
If the founding fathers knew we would be this stupid as to the wording of the 2nd ,they would have done something like this..........
Hay Dudes ,every American can own any damn gun they want ,when they want ,and if they murder someone with it you hang the MF ,and not blame the gun. The 1st Amendment ain't there to control the 2nd ,And the 2nd is there to keep the rest of this document alive, so keep your pea picking hands off private gun ownership!! In this ,Americans will also be allowed to own any type ammunition for these guns ,so don't mess with that either.

How would you guys have wrote it ?
 

· Master Window Licker
Joined
·
909 Posts
Just like you did, but they would still come up with...

well, some kind of stupid lib crap to F with us. When are we gonna stand up and say its enough?
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,167 Posts
This is how I would have proposed it

How would you guys have wrote it ?
Notwithstanding a well trained Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, conversly, the inherent right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed by government.

If this was the current wording, there would be no issue. The term "government" would include federal and state governments.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,210 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
2ndShooter ,is on to something there.
The guys on the night shift emailed me saying that they were watching Fox last night and some air head was talking about the guns that would be permissible.
Certain revolvers with approved safety slugs ,in other words , you would be better off with a cross bow.
No semis , and the gun couldn't leave your home.
I have been watching S&W ,they have released the Model 27 again ,this time is is an 8 shot , Locking device , recommended to use 38sp .
It and the 19 have always been one of my favorites, but this thing is expensive ,PC, and Gen. Patton would be turning in his grave.
We cant blame the gun makers ,they are there to sell guns and you watch ,they all will be offering this type weapon soon.
What i don't understand is what part of ( Shall NOT be infringed ) don't they understand ?
One Liberal even said (fine ,then civilians should be armed with the guns of the era that the 2nd was referring to ).
I fear this is going to open a Pandora's box on gun ownership.
Im sure Patton is turning in his grave, as are the Founding Fathers.
The crossbow thing had me, those would be next.
I get one of those stupid gun locks every time I buy a gun now, I don't buy those pistols with locks built into them either, I hate the PC crap.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
Just like you did, but they would still come up with...

well, some kind of stupid lib crap to F with us. When are we gonna stand up and say its enough?
D8 there are too many people that will lay down and get run over by the goober'ment-the minute they see Red tape they panic and obey whatever the goober'ment officials say. Just like the argument that ak47's are all full auto if the people don't know better, then they have to agree with what ever someone tells them, I argue this all time....the ordinary citizen is just plain stupid.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
480 Posts
I agree, Phal. The Left will find this an ideal time to wind up a few nuts and point them at crowds. Happens far too often when it's "convenient". Libtards don't want us armed. It threatens their ability to control us.
Hit the nail on the head

I just wonder how many more times these c***%$#kers will take the Second Amendment to the table for arguements sake in front of the same Judges/Justices and get the same verdict, what part of its unconstitutional don't they get.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
1,334 Posts
After reading the arguments, I am left with the uneasy notion that our side is standing in the middle of the briar patch, pulling sticker's out of their butt.
To me they conseeded the reasonable limitations on gun ownership are fine. They did us no favors with this thinking.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top