Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Shall not be infringed
a bunch of commas and militia talk. Its pretty poorly written or needs translated into real English.
What to do is look at how it was enforced in 1800 and that seems to be that folks could own guns and carry them around. I don't see the debate there.
Maybe guns can be registered, maybe guns can be restricted from certain places but it seems clear the application of the 2nd during the lifetimes of its writers even if it was poorly written.
Only because people like you are anti gun nutters
Smart politics would be to be friends with the guy who says the writers of the 2nd obviously intended folks to own firearms.
But yeah, if you wanna argue, I think your guns are effectively registered if you have a Google or Facebook app on your smartphone and the NRA is a bunch of idiots or scared sissy team worshipers for not realizing it and defending privacy rights.
Once again though, the implementation of the 2nd is clear, the NRA are idiot sissies or team worshipers and I'm just bringing the latter up since you poked me.
That's nice....but...shall not be infringed. Suck on it
Shall not be infringed
a bunch of commas and militia talk. Its pretty poorly written or needs translated into real English.
What to do is look at how it was enforced in 1800 and that seems to be that folks could own guns and carry them around. I don't see the debate there.
Maybe guns can be registered, maybe guns can be restricted from certain places but it seems clear the application of the 2nd during the lifetimes of its writers even if it was poorly written.
Only because people like you are anti gun nutters
Smart politics would be to be friends with the guy who says the writers of the 2nd obviously intended folks to own firearms.
But yeah, if you wanna argue, I think your guns are effectively registered if you have a Google or Facebook app on your smartphone and the NRA is a bunch of idiots or scared sissy team worshipers for not realizing it and defending privacy rights.
Once again though, the implementation of the 2nd is clear, the NRA are idiot sissies or team worshipers and I'm just bringing the latter up since you poked me.
That's nice....but...shall not be infringed. Suck on it
"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."
ok, go join the National Guard and get a gun then! They might just send you to defend the border from folks we should make into future Americans lol.
Really your best argument is looking at how it was implemented not quoting the darned thing.
ok, go join the National Guard and get a gun then!
ok, go join the National Guard and get a gun then!
United States Code
Title 10 - ARMED FORCES
Subtitle A - General Military Law
PART I - ORGANIZATION AND GENERAL MILITARY POWERS
CHAPTER 13 - THE MILITIA
Sec. 311 - Militia: composition and classes
From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov
§311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Now I really so thank you for posting that. No one has for a year I've been making fun of the language.
`Why? Did the facts change when you went elsewhere?
`No argument. I think the links are hilarious. "Guns up the ass reports on carry restrictions."
`No argument. I think the links are hilarious. "Guns up the ass reports on carry restrictions."
The Circuit court ruled on a narrow point of Massachusetts state law, hardly applicable to to the entire country much less to the 2nd Amendment as a whole.
U.S.A. -(Ammoland.com)- On 2 November 2018, the First Circuit Court of Appeals held the Second Amendment effectively does not apply outside the home. From uscourts.gov:
This case involves a constitutional challenge to the Massachusetts firearms licensing statute, as implemented in the communities of Boston and Brookline. All of the individual plaintiffs sought and received licenses from one of those two communities to carry firearms in public. The licenses, though, were restricted: they allowed the plaintiffs to carry firearms only in relation to certain specified activities but denied them the right to carry firearms more generally.
First Circuit Court of Appeals Rule No Right to Bear Arms Outside the Home
View attachment 228714
http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2202P-01A.pdf
Well the morons will turn them in when they offer you money for them, pushed into hard times hard up for money why turn in your guns we will give you money for them , that way we can sell them back out into the streets.
That way it takes away all your methods that are free will and a right to protect your home, family etc...
They are pushing for the COPS to lose their guns too.
It is a sad day when ppl are so dumbed down they haven't a clue the 2nd amendment is for . MORE THAN TO OWN A GUN ILLITERATE IDIOTS.
U.S.A. -(Ammoland.com)- On 2 November 2018, the First Circuit Court of Appeals held the Second Amendment effectively does not apply outside the home. From uscourts.gov:
This case involves a constitutional challenge to the Massachusetts firearms licensing statute, as implemented in the communities of Boston and Brookline. All of the individual plaintiffs sought and received licenses from one of those two communities to carry firearms in public. The licenses, though, were restricted: they allowed the plaintiffs to carry firearms only in relation to certain specified activities but denied them the right to carry firearms more generally.
First Circuit Court of Appeals Rule No Right to Bear Arms Outside the Home
View attachment 228714
http://media.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/17-2202P-01A.pdf
Well the morons will turn them in when they offer you money for them, pushed into hard times hard up for money why turn in your guns we will give you money for them , that way we can sell them back out into the streets.
That way it takes away all your methods that are free will and a right to protect your home, family etc...
They are pushing for the COPS to lose their guns too.
It is a sad day when ppl are so dumbed down they haven't a clue the 2nd amendment is for . MORE THAN TO OWN A GUN ILLITERATE IDIOTS.
`So if Georgia the state I live in, decided to ban a religion, as a State, then that would be fine, since it didn’t apply the the nation as a whole, much less to the entire First Amendment? The Bill of Rights are individual rights, available and guaranteed to all citizens, in the nation. It is a promise to each of us individually. I may not exercise my First Amendment right to peaceably assemble, but it is my right, and it should not be laughed off as a few people, or not affecting things as a whole.It is one of the reasons why I object to police misconduct. It might only happen in a few cases, but those rights, are individual and when one of us loses just a little, it affects the whole, and should be opposed by the whole of all citizens.
`So if Georgia the state I live in, decided to ban a religion, as a State, then that would be fine, since it didn’t apply the the nation as a whole, much less to the entire First Amendment? The Bill of Rights are individual rights, available and guaranteed to all citizens, in the nation. It is a promise to each of us individually. I may not exercise my First Amendment right to peaceably assemble, but it is my right, and it should not be laughed off as a few people, or not affecting things as a whole.It is one of the reasons why I object to police misconduct. It might only happen in a few cases, but those rights, are individual and when one of us loses just a little, it affects the whole, and should be opposed by the whole of all citizens.
You can read into it it anything you please. The point remains, it was a ruling meant for the state of Massachusetts.
`
Wtf? I could carry a rifle down the street when I was 11. Wtf is this shit?
Come get them gun banner`
I'd just as soon get my facts from another source other than "AmmoLand.com".
You got to read it in the context of the era… Apparently you’re too stupid to realize thatShall not be infringed
a bunch of commas and militia talk. Its pretty poorly written or needs translated into real English.
What to do is look at how it was enforced in 1800 and that seems to be that folks could own guns and carry them around. I don't see the debate there.
Maybe guns can be registered, maybe guns can be restricted from certain places but it seems clear the application of the 2nd during the lifetimes of its writers even if it was poorly written.
