A cop who supports the Constitutional carry of firearms for law abiding citizens..

[2aguy]

Yep.....the argument that cops don't want constitutional carry because that would mean the people they stop would have guns...is absurd...since the criminals they actually do stop will carry a gun no matter what the law says....and law abiding gun owners carrying guns will not shoot police .......

Here is one cop talking about the issue....

[Video] Cops On Constitutional Carry - The Gun Feed

 

[JakeStarkey]

Some do, some don't. You found one who does.

And a reminder: oh, you are no constitutional scholar on the 2d amendment.

 

[2aguy]

Some do, some don't. You found one who does.

And a reminder: oh, you are no constitutional scholar on the 2d amendment.

Yeah, it doesn't take a scholar to inteperet..."Shall not be infringed." Ding Bat.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Some do, some don't. You found one who does.

And a reminder: oh, you are no constitutional scholar on the 2d amendment.

Yeah, it doesn't take a scholar to inteperet..."Shall not be infringed." Ding Bat.

You have shown consistently you do not understand the language.

 

[2aguy]

Some do, some don't. You found one who does.

And a reminder: oh, you are no constitutional scholar on the 2d amendment.

Yeah, it doesn't take a scholar to inteperet..."Shall not be infringed." Ding Bat.

You have shown consistently you do not understand the language.

Yeah....a simple sentence.......I can see how you wouldn't understand it...."The Right of the People to keep and Bear Arms....shall not be infringed." Wow...that is a tough one.......I guess I should go to Law School to figure that one out.....

 

[JakeStarkey]

Some do, some don't. You found one who does.

And a reminder: oh, you are no constitutional scholar on the 2d amendment.

Yeah, it doesn't take a scholar to inteperet..."Shall not be infringed." Ding Bat.

You have shown consistently you do not understand the language.

Yeah....a simple sentence.......I can see how you wouldn't understand it...."The Right of the People to keep and Bear Arms....shall not be infringed." Wow...that is a tough one.......I guess I should go to Law School to figure that one out.....

Yes, you are right that you don't understand it, as you just proved above. You don't get a missile frigate in your bath tub.

 

[2aguy]

Some do, some don't. You found one who does.

And a reminder: oh, you are no constitutional scholar on the 2d amendment.

Yeah, it doesn't take a scholar to inteperet..."Shall not be infringed." Ding Bat.

You have shown consistently you do not understand the language.

Yeah....a simple sentence.......I can see how you wouldn't understand it...."The Right of the People to keep and Bear Arms....shall not be infringed." Wow...that is a tough one.......I guess I should go to Law School to figure that one out.....

Yes, you are right that you don't understand it, as you just proved above. You don't get a missile frigate in your bath tub.

Bear arms....to carry weapons.....last I could figure you can't carry a missle frigate on your body asswipe....wow...I might be able to audit all 3 years of Law School if that is the toughest problem with the Constitution...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Some do, some don't. You found one who does.

And a reminder: oh, you are no constitutional scholar on the 2d amendment.

Yeah, it doesn't take a scholar to inteperet..."Shall not be infringed." Ding Bat.

You have shown consistently you do not understand the language.

Yeah....a simple sentence.......I can see how you wouldn't understand it...."The Right of the People to keep and Bear Arms....shall not be infringed." Wow...that is a tough one.......I guess I should go to Law School to figure that one out.....

Yes, you are right that you don't understand it, as you just proved above. You don't get a missile frigate in your bath tub.

Bear arms....to carry weapons.....last I could figure you can't carry a missle frigate on your body asswipe....wow...I might be able to audit all 3 years of Law School if that is the toughest problem with the Constitution...

You would fail out in the first month. Your silly definition means you could carry and operate a mortar. Watch the Court use Heller to support the 4th.

 

[2aguy]

Yeah, it doesn't take a scholar to inteperet..."Shall not be infringed." Ding Bat.

You have shown consistently you do not understand the language.

Yeah....a simple sentence.......I can see how you wouldn't understand it...."The Right of the People to keep and Bear Arms....shall not be infringed." Wow...that is a tough one.......I guess I should go to Law School to figure that one out.....

Yes, you are right that you don't understand it, as you just proved above. You don't get a missile frigate in your bath tub.

Bear arms....to carry weapons.....last I could figure you can't carry a missle frigate on your body asswipe....wow...I might be able to audit all 3 years of Law School if that is the toughest problem with the Constitution...

You would fail out in the first month. Your silly definition means you could carry and operate a mortar. Watch the Court use Heller to support the 4th.

And according to Scalia, that would be bannable under the 2nd Amendment...as he Cites Miller and it's "Unusual and dangerous" limit on weapons....and a mortar is a crew served weapon dipshit.......

Rifles and pistols are bearable, normal and covered....grenades, and mortars can be considered "unusual and dangerous," as found in Heller....

AR-15s are the most common American Civilian rifle....and it can be carried.....it is protected by he second...moron.

 

[JakeStarkey]

uh, 2aguy, from my voice to your hear . . . Scalia is dead.

Heller will be used to uphold the 4th.

 

[2aguy]

uh, 2aguy, from my voice to your hear . . . Scalia is dead.

Heller will be used to uphold the 4th.

Only if left wing assholes make the decision....the 2nd Amendment states that the 4th circuit is wrong...our Right to self defense makes them wrong....Heller just clarifies if for simpletons like you....

 

[JakeStarkey]

Only your misguided opinion, 2aguy, nothing else

 

[2aguy]

uh, 2aguy, from my voice to your hear . . . Scalia is dead.

Heller will be used to uphold the 4th.

Heller, Miller and Caetano state to the 4th circuit that they are morons who don't know Legal Precedent..since they are activists in robes and not judges.....


https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf


Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people.” We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

-------
Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people.”

We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001), the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

--------

n Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE GINSBURG wrote that “urely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment . . . indicate: ‘wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’” I

And miller.......



Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

The AR-15 and magazine fed rifles are the most common rifles in use at this time.......moron....

 

[JakeStarkey]

There you go again quoting Justice 2aguy.

 

[tycho1572]