A Troubling Ruling for Second Amendment Advocates.

[whitehall]

It's interesting that there is a political label (2nd Amendment advocates) for Americans who respect the entire Constitution but no label for those who attack it. Why should Bill of Rights advocates be on the defensive after the greatest document in human existence established the greatest Country on the planet? Why debate the Bill of Rights after 250 years of freedom? Figure it out.

A) Not everyone who is an advocate of the 2nd Amendment cares about the entire COTUS, in fact most hardcore gungho second amendment folks are idiots who have no concept of the COTUS and merely fear that the gummit gonna get their guns.

B) Not everyone who advocates SOME for of gun control hates the COTUS

C) If the COTUS were so easily understood then all of these things would have been worked out years ago. What i find especially funny is that people who can barely write a legible sentence think they understand the COTUS better than trained legal scholars.

You gotta wonder about posters who call themselves "the brain" and use a cartoon character to represent themselves. The unsubstantiated argument that "not everyone who is an advocate of the 2nd Amendment cares about the Constitution" is just about as stupid as using the word "hates" and about as disrespectful as using the acronym COTUS for the US Constitution. There is about a room full of law books dedicated to restrictions on the the 2nd amendment. When the left uses the term "restrictions" they usually mean confiscation. Remember that when arguing with anti-COTUS neo-socialists.
When they start talking about the 1st Amendment watch out.

 

[TheBrain]

It's interesting that there is a political label (2nd Amendment advocates) for Americans who respect the entire Constitution but no label for those who attack it. Why should Bill of Rights advocates be on the defensive after the greatest document in human existence established the greatest Country on the planet? Why debate the Bill of Rights after 250 years of freedom? Figure it out.

A) Not everyone who is an advocate of the 2nd Amendment cares about the entire COTUS, in fact most hardcore gungho second amendment folks are idiots who have no concept of the COTUS and merely fear that the gummit gonna get their guns.

B) Not everyone who advocates SOME for of gun control hates the COTUS

C) If the COTUS were so easily understood then all of these things would have been worked out years ago. What i find especially funny is that people who can barely write a legible sentence think they understand the COTUS better than trained legal scholars.

You gotta wonder about posters who call themselves "the brain" and use a cartoon character to represent themselves. The unsubstantiated argument that "not everyone who is an advocate of the 2nd Amendment cares about the Constitution" is just about as stupid as using the word "hates" and about as disrespectful as using the acronym COTUS for the US Constitution. There is about a room full of law books dedicated to restrictions on the the 2nd amendment. When the left uses the term "restrictions" they usually mean confiscation. Remember that when arguing with anti-COTUS neo-socialists.
When they start talking about the 1st Amendment watch out.

It's a fucking message board, if you don't like my avatar, too bad.

As for unsubstantiated arguments. You're arguing that I have to substantiate a negative? No, you first made the claim that people who are 2nd Amendment advocates care about the entire COTUS, so the onus is on YOU to prove that.

As for the abbreviation of COTUS, not only is in not disrespectful, it is in fact an accepted acronym. Much like SCOTUS , POTUS, and FLOTUS.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You gotta wonder about posters who call themselves "the brain" and use a cartoon character to represent themselves.

The cartoon character's name is "Brain".

 

[TheBrain]

You gotta wonder about posters who call themselves "the brain" and use a cartoon character to represent themselves.

The cartoon character's name is "Brain".

I thought EVERYONE was an Inspector Gadget fan.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You gotta wonder about posters who call themselves "the brain" and use a cartoon character to represent themselves.

The cartoon character's name is "Brain".

I thought EVERYONE was an Inspector Gadget fan.

No, when I was a pre-teen we called it "Inspector Faggot".

 

[TheBrain]

The cartoon character's name is "Brain".

I thought EVERYONE was an Inspector Gadget fan.

No, when I was a pre-teen we called it "Inspector Faggot".

Hmm, how hateful.

 

[RadiomanATL]

I thought EVERYONE was an Inspector Gadget fan.

No, when I was a pre-teen we called it "Inspector Faggot".

Hmm, how hateful.

I can live with it.

 

[Two Thumbs]

This is a states rights issue.

If you don't like the way the state vote went, move.

 

[Contumacious]

Yes, that's exactly what I said. People don't think ANY restrictions are reasonable when it comes to the right that matters most to them. ANYONE who is honest and reasonable would admit that there are valid reasons to limit what weapons people may use. For instance, if we had NO limits then a felon couldn't even be barred from owning a weapon, because the COTUS says that the government may not pass ANY laws. Are you suggesting that you support allowing convicted felons to own firearms?

1) Criminals will acquire firearms no matter what SCOTUS says

2) Convicted felons have a right to life and to defend the same

3) The welfare//warfare state has unconstitutionally criminalized many acts which are not criminal per se, ie, drug use. So why should someone who was convicted of smoking a joint be prevented from bearing arms?!?!?!?!?!?

.

1. People who want to kill will kill regardless of the law, so why do we bother having a law against murder?

This is a dumb argument. Americans are free people. They have a right to life and to defend the same. They do not have a right to kill their neighbor.

2. No, they don't in fact. Don't like the law petition to have it changed, but as of today they in fact do NOT have that right.

3. Drug use is illegal. Regardless of how you personally feel about it, again if you don't like it petition to have the law changed, until such time as it is changed, you're expected to obey the law.

Americans have the absolute right - secured by the Ninth Amendment - to self medicate. Any law to the contrary is null and void without any legal effect.

.

 

[TheBrain]

No, when I was a pre-teen we called it "Inspector Faggot".

Hmm, how hateful.

I can live with it.

Me to.

 

[TheBrain]

1) Criminals will acquire firearms no matter what SCOTUS says

2) Convicted felons have a right to life and to defend the same

3) The welfare//warfare state has unconstitutionally criminalized many acts which are not criminal per se, ie, drug use. So why should someone who was convicted of smoking a joint be prevented from bearing arms?!?!?!?!?!?

.

1. People who want to kill will kill regardless of the law, so why do we bother having a law against murder?

This is a dumb argument. Americans are free people. They have a right to life and to defend the same. They do not have a right to kill their neighbor.

2. No, they don't in fact. Don't like the law petition to have it changed, but as of today they in fact do NOT have that right.

3. Drug use is illegal. Regardless of how you personally feel about it, again if you don't like it petition to have the law changed, until such time as it is changed, you're expected to obey the law.

Americans have the absolute right - secured by the Ninth Amendment - to self medicate. Any law to the contrary is null and void without any legal effect.

.

A) You made the argument that passing laws wouldn't keep people from acting illegally, not me

B) The Ninth amendment does NOT give you the absolute right to self medicate. If that were true there would be no such thing as prescriptions, you'd simply go to wal mart and buy whatever you wanted; but that is irrelevant anyway since we are talking about drugs that are not certified as medication.

 

[RadiomanATL]

Hmm, how hateful.

I can live with it.

Me to.

Good for you.

 

[TheBrain]

I can live with it.

Me to.

Good for you.

And for you as well.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

The cartoon character's name is "Brain".

I thought EVERYONE was an Inspector Gadget fan.

No, when I was a pre-teen we called it "Inspector Faggot".

Wasn't the brain a rat?
The Brain: Yes, finally! The Happy Sappy Children of Many Lands ride! Where cheering music will spread the message that a mouse should rule the world!
Pinky: Oh no, Brain. Narf! You're thinking of that other park in Orlando

 

[TheBrain]

I thought EVERYONE was an Inspector Gadget fan.

No, when I was a pre-teen we called it "Inspector Faggot".

Wasn't the brain a rat?
The Brain: Yes, finally! The Happy Sappy Children of Many Lands ride! Where cheering music will spread the message that a mouse should rule the world!
Pinky: Oh no, Brain. Narf! You're thinking of that other park in Orlando

Different Brain. Brain was Inspector Gadget's niece Penny's dog.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

no, when i was a pre-teen we called it "inspector faggot".

wasn't the brain a rat?
The brain: Yes, finally! The happy sappy children of many lands ride! Where cheering music will spread the message that a mouse should rule the world!
Pinky: Oh no, brain. Narf! You're thinking of that other park in orlando

different brain. Brain was inspector gadget's niece penny's dog.

tmi

 

[Contumacious]

1. People who want to kill will kill regardless of the law, so why do we bother having a law against murder?

This is a dumb argument. Americans are free people. They have a right to life and to defend the same. They do not have a right to kill their neighbor.

2. No, they don't in fact. Don't like the law petition to have it changed, but as of today they in fact do NOT have that right.

3. Drug use is illegal. Regardless of how you personally feel about it, again if you don't like it petition to have the law changed, until such time as it is changed, you're expected to obey the law.

Americans have the absolute right - secured by the Ninth Amendment - to self medicate. Any law to the contrary is null and void without any legal effect.

.

A) You made the argument that passing laws wouldn't keep people from acting illegally, not me

Of course not, the criminal element will always ignore the law. How the fuck did the US Government become a gargantuan welfare/warfare state? You guessed it, by ignoring the law.

B) The Ninth amendment does NOT give you the absolute right to self medicate. If that were true there would be no such thing as prescriptions, you'd simply go to wal mart and buy whatever you wanted; but that is irrelevant anyway since we are talking about drugs that are not certified as medication.

There are 2, 400,000 individuals in prison because they consume drugs that are not "certified" as a medicine.

There are thousands of medications which are sold over the counter where the consumer is on his own.

Since it sounds like you do not have the wherewithal to be a discriminate consumer, stick to prayer.

Hallelujah.

.

.

 

[TheBrain]

This is a dumb argument. Americans are free people. They have a right to life and to defend the same. They do not have a right to kill their neighbor.



Americans have the absolute right - secured by the Ninth Amendment - to self medicate. Any law to the contrary is null and void without any legal effect.

.

A) You made the argument that passing laws wouldn't keep people from acting illegally, not me

Of course not, the criminal element will always ignore the law. How the fuck did the US Government become a gargantuan welfare/warfare state? You guessed it, by ignoring the law.

B) The Ninth amendment does NOT give you the absolute right to self medicate. If that were true there would be no such thing as prescriptions, you'd simply go to wal mart and buy whatever you wanted; but that is irrelevant anyway since we are talking about drugs that are not certified as medication.

There are 2, 400,000 individuals in prison because they consume drugs that are not "certified" as a medicine.

There are thousands of medications which are sold over the counter where the consumer is on his own.

Since it sounds like you do not have the wherewithal to be a discriminate consumer, stick to prayer.

Hallelujah.

.

.

There are literally millions of products on the market, that doesn't mean you have a right to any of them.

I love when people don't understand what a right is.

 

[The Rabbi]

I believe that any law designed to preempt, restrict, or otherwise curtail any right enumerated in the Bill of Rights should be subject to strict scrutiny, the highest standard of judicial review - including the Second Amendment right to self defense.

I believe I should be able to screw super models. Believing doesnt make it so.

 

[Contumacious]

I believe that any law designed to preempt, restrict, or otherwise curtail any right enumerated in the Bill of Rights should be subject to strict scrutiny, the highest standard of judicial review - including the Second Amendment right to self defense.

I believe I should be able to screw super models. Believing doesnt make it so.

HUH?
WTF?
Is there a right to enslave?

Just because you guys have managed to enslaved the Palestinians doesn't mean that you have the right!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

.