p
“Stand back, everybody. We’re gonna do some infringing. And we’re going to do just as much infringing as we feel like doing. Because there’s nothing that says we can’t infringe.”
Bulcrap argument
700 years ago most english folks were serfs without virtually any rights at all
Well, Heck!
Just how in Tarnation do they think I am supposed to carry my guns down to the cop shop for turn-in?
Appeal to the CONSERVATIVE Supreme court!!!!!!
The most consistent pointmof englis law is that the people have had to demand and fight the elites for every single right they have, because both english and colonists never got their rights any other way from the english.
The history of england is denying common people rigts, taking away what little rights they have, of the elites love of serfdom, and the people fighting against royalty for every square inch of freedom and rights they demanded be acknowledged and protected.
Their own peoples, the scots, welsh, the irish, the colonists.
Now these incredible dunces try this crap logic.
2nd Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
From dictionary, definition of “bear”:
FORMAL•LITERARY
(of a person) carry (someone or something).
“he was bearing a tray of brimming glasses”
Federalist No. 28 excerpt:
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no resource left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers, may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual state. In a single state, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.ML/NJ
Going back into the precedent in England eh?
Didn’t we fight a revolution to overthrow our English Masters in 1776 and construct a Bill of Rights that ensured we would not be be made into subjects again?
Poor thinking by the Judges, as one reason the 2nd Amendment is to be interpreted as is, is because the writers were well aware of what the English had in their laws.
They rejected
Bushworld strikes again. They damage this guy created lingers like Herpes.
1 : to carry or possess arms
9th circus court, as per usual
Get it?
I have absolutely no confidence the Robert's Court is going to right this travesty of justice. I hope I'm proven wrong.
The George W. Bush appointee judge who wrote the opinion had a son who committed suicide with a gun in 2013. See link above. Sounds like a real unbiased opinion.
They sure would hate Vermont.
They sure would hate Vermont.
It’s a state constitutional right where I live so tell the 9th Circus to suck it.
Red states matter.
Hate to to break to the commie bozos in robes, but...
That issue will be settled in the streets.
Eventually.
And we’ll win.
But I have a lot of faith in Frat Boy and RCB Redux and no-standing Roberts and they will run as fast as they can from this case. Standing? Who actually has a harm? Besides, what do you think we can do about it? Nuffin, I tell ya.
What does 700 years have to do with anything? For ~250 years the second amendment, which is not just a law, has specifically prohibited the government from infringing our right to keep and bear, own and carry, firearms.