...like that actually ever happens.
Gun restrictions, with possibly the exception for mental illness, are in place to protect government officials, not citizens.
The bumpstock banner and gun grabber gabbard are running the show. Shall be infringed by republicans.
The USSCt needs to issue a clear and unambiguous defense of the US Constitution. Bruen did that but Rahisi back=tread. “Shall not be infringed” means, well, “shall not be infringed.”
As American citizens, we are entitled to honest and forth-right USSCt rulings defending, upholding, and yes, restoring our civil rights and constitutional liberties. This includes overruling all of the infringing “laws” and “regulations” while also abolishing the “regulatory” agencies that deprive Americans of our rights on an ongoing, daily basis.
There’s a reason why there’s such widespread disdain, disrespect, and utter contempt of the law (and our judiciary).
It is because the courts are so contemptably disrespectful and disdainful of our natural law rights and liberties.
They bring all this contempt upon themselves. They’re very very very lucky that American citizens haven’t already taken the matter into their own hands
I think the strategy is to keep passing laws which are hopelessly unconstitutional and let them take effect for a couple years until they are inevitably overturned by higher courts.
“The AT4CS AST is a weapon optimised for urban combat, capable of defeating multiple target types as well as creating new entry points into buildings.”
“The AT4CS HE provides the single soldier with overmatching firepower to defeat enemy troops at range.”
“600 m (impact mode/point targets)
1000 m (airburst mode)”
“It also includes confined-space capability...Airburst mode for defeating troops behind cover or in trenches is possible using a compatible external sight mounted to the weapon.”
https://www.saab.com/products/at4
The judges have at least 150 years of precedent to be overcome.
Who are they to say that Virgil Cole and Wyatt Erp were disregarding the constitution as they enforced their rules in Appaloosa and Tombstone?
The subtleties of the new SCOTUS must all be brought to the surface and delt with.
The Supreme Court is not going to rule that a law banning possession of a machine gun is unconstitutional under the second amendment. If you look closely at the decisions the court has issued in the last 20 years, the only thing that they clearly said about the right to bear arms is that the state cannot ban you from possessing a gun in your own home. That leaves room for a lot more regulation that the court has not ruled on yet.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!
can the 14th Amendment section III be used to dismiss these activists who are in “rebellion” of our Constitution?
asking for a friend
*The Ninth resorted to delaying the appeal of some cases from Judge Benitez and calling an en banc hearing to overrule.
*The Fourth Circuit delayed publishing a decision against Maryland's gun control until another panel could rule in favor in another case, and then published the second case first so they could claim it established precedent and not the first. Utterly dishonest.;
*The Seventh Circuit decided to confabulate its own rule about "military arms" being exempt from Bruen without any prior precedent or legal definition to substantiate their ruling upholding Illinois' draconian gun bans.
All these circuits are simply dragging their feet hoping a death or retirement on SCOTUS will present an opportunity to undo Bruen. They should be impeached for the dishonesty and refusal to follow precedent and SCOTUS seems incapable or unwilling to enforce any discipline.