Posted on 07/04/2016 4:36:37 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA
Okay, so SCOTUS has just overturned the Texas safety provisions/regultions because they said the intent was not safety, but rather it was to limit women's access to abortion.
Why are the CA ammo laws any different?
Forget it, Red. It’s Obama-town.
Bullshit. Never stop fighting for what is right. THIS is when you stop fighting (NSFW):
C’mon. We all know this. Conservatives with guns are evil. Conservatives should Praise 0bama we are allowed to breathe. Infant sacrifice is the Holy Sacrament and Communion of libtard theology. Anything that prevents libtards from worshipping their God has to be prevented by all means.
I think Scott Adams said it quite succinctly the other day, “Democrats don’t want conservatives to be able to protect themselves. Conservatives want guns so they can protect themselves from Democrats that use guns to shoot innocent people.”
Democrats know gun laws will never apply to them. Those laws are only for those evil conservatives. Doubt me? Think Lois Lerner.
Com’on Red,
You know the difference.
Texas Law bad because Liberals said, the intent was not safety, but rather it was to limit women’s access to abortion.
You know, that unwritten clause in the “privacy” amendment. Where ever that is.
4th? 5th? I donno.
California Law good because Conservatives say, the intent is not safety, but rather it is to limit Freemen access to firearms.
Ya know, as written & ratified in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, adopted on December 15, 1791,as part of the original BILL OF RIGHTS.
Oh thats easy...
The right to abortion was established by the Supreme Court.
The right to bear arms was only in the constitution (Which the Supreme Court doesn’t like)
Because 4 liberal justices plus Anthony Kennedy will agree to California’s new Ammo regulations, the same way they disagreed with the Texas abortion case. No Constitutional principles are being applied here. It’s merely ad hoc law — liberal style.
Exactly. Because when the Constitution can be twisted to support “progressive” causes, it will be.
When it can be twisted to harm Conservatives and increase government power, it will be.
At least 5 Supremes have no integrity. They have agendas.
Exactly. The court is out of control.
As someone on another thread posted..Time for the Indian Reservations in Kali-pornia to go into the guns and ammo business.
At some point, if not already past, patriots will have to defy the courts and the regime. An unjust law is no law and must not be obeyed - no matter the consequences.
“The Chief Justice has made his decision, now let him enforce it.” Andrew Jackson
A clever argument, despite all the wet blankets around here today.
You’re right, they aren’t. If one is an unconstitutional infringement, certainly the ammo bill is as well. Time for the Supreme Court to start applying the strict scrutiny test to every regulation impacting the 2nd amendment.
The ammo bill is ridiculous—like requiring a driver’s license to buy a car, and then years later saying “By the way, now you need a second license to buy gasoline.” People have already run through the background check once. Once is enough. I think what they actually want to do with the ammo thing is twofold: Make shooting harder and harder (which is bad, because people need to practice in order to maintain skills, including safety skills), and more nefariously, use the ammo data base to run it against the CA gun registry and see if they are buying calibers other than for guns registered to them in CA. You can figure out the rest.
9th Circus gets if first; that’s almost a slam-dunk anti-gun verdict.
If it isn’t a slam dunk in the original 3 judge panel, they will hear it en banc, and undo the panel ruling. That is what they did with Peruta.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.