Lawsuit filed against Bump stocks, Feinstein crying

[pismoe]

Yep, Gun Owners of America - "No Compromise"

------------------------------------ yep , NO Compromise or no more infringement and work to remove existing infringements MaryAm .

 

[WheelieAddict]

Any time that hateful lying Democrat asshole is pissed it is good for America.

It is illegal for the government to infringe upon the right to keep and bear arms.

Feinstein Fumes as GOA Formally Files Bump Stock Suit | Current Action Alerts

Sen. Feinstein upset about GOA’s lawsuit

Senator Feinstein Rails Against Gun Owners of America
Dear Friend:

Gun Owners of America today filed its lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s illegal and unconstitutional bump stock ban.

GOA's action came on the same day the administration published the regulations in the Federal Register.

Already, gun control advocates have become very dispirited.

Senator Dianne Feinstein lamented that the lawsuit by Gun Owners of America would keep the bump stock ban “tied up in court for years.”

Well, well. Wouldn’t that just be a shame. LOL

Anyway, Gun Owners of America has filed its lawsuit in the Western District of Michigan. You can read it here.

Didn't the trump administration outlaw bump stocks by king trumps executive order?

 

[pismoe]

thats simple,,,

the 2nd meant the government has no say in either the militia or infringing on private ownership

discussion over

That is why everyone has access to grenades, nuclear weapons, and homebuilt combat ready F-16 fighters. Wait, maybe there are limits to the second amendment.

discussion not over

------------------------------------ every American has the RIGHT to the same Arms issued to the Individual American Combat Soldier BDad

 

[WheelieAddict]

NRA members............your nothing but a tool

 

[pismoe]

and some people are fools WAddict !!

 

[WheelieAddict]

and some people are fools WAddict !!

truly

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just as many on the Right call for a reinterpretation of the Fourteenth, to eliminate Anchor Baby status...

So, too, should those on the Left call for a reinterpretation of the Second, to better "regulate" our "militia" -at-large...

Then call for it. Who's stopping you? What do you suppose the decision would be with the Supreme Court we have now?

 

[Kondor3]

Just as many on the Right call for a reinterpretation of the Fourteenth, to eliminate Anchor Baby status...

So, too, should those on the Left call for a reinterpretation of the Second, to better "regulate" our "militia" -at-large...

------------------------------- NO , not in my opinion as the 2nd is an Original RIGHT . The 14th and all Amendments after the 10th are just favors or Grants or permission from the Government Kondor .

To my way of thinking, both are declarations of rights, rather than grants or favors.

And, from time to time, questions arise as to what was meant in any given declaration.

That's where "interpretation" comes in.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

And, let's face it, it's a matter of the General Welfare and Public Safety.

I have yet to see a news story about somebody pointing an Anchor Baby at a citizen and killing him with it.

The time has come to "well regulate" our "militia" (citizenry-at-large), in a firearms context.

 

[Kondor3]

Just as many on the Right call for a reinterpretation of the Fourteenth, to eliminate Anchor Baby status...

So, too, should those on the Left call for a reinterpretation of the Second, to better "regulate" our "militia" -at-large...

Then call for it. Who's stopping you? What do you suppose the decision would be with the Supreme Court we have now?

I have no power to do so.

As to the Supreme Court, that's a very good question.

The thing about a lifetime appointment is... once you're "in", you don't have to worry about partisan politics any longer.

We routinely see our now-conservative-leaning SCOTUS serving-up surprisingly contrary decisions... swing-votes and all that, eh?

It will take someone with far more power and legal skills than I possess, to bring-on that challenge.

And, you're right, it might very well face an uphill battle in any SCOTUS hearing.

Yet, the challenge will come, and if not now, sometime soon (as history measures time), as more thousands of innocent Americans die.

That does not, in the meantime, prevent ordinary American citizens from advocating for such an effort - as we see here.

 

[Kondor3]

Just as many on the Right call for a reinterpretation of the Fourteenth, to eliminate Anchor Baby status...

So, too, should those on the Left call for a reinterpretation of the Second, to better "regulate" our "militia" -at-large...

the original intent was NOT anchor babies.

go read.

The Fourteenth is silent on the matter.

It was interpretation of the Fourteenth which gave us Anchor Babies as de facto citizens.

Interpretation.

Which occurs whenever original intent is questioned, and the matter is considered by the Supreme Court.

 

[iceberg]

Just as many on the Right call for a reinterpretation of the Fourteenth, to eliminate Anchor Baby status...

So, too, should those on the Left call for a reinterpretation of the Second, to better "regulate" our "militia" -at-large...

the original intent was NOT anchor babies.

go read.

The Fourteenth is silent on the matter.

It was interpretation of the Fourteenth which gave us Anchor Babies as de facto citizens.

Interpretation.

Which occurs whenever original intent is questioned, and the matter is considered by the Supreme Court.

go read about original intent. its available.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just as many on the Right call for a reinterpretation of the Fourteenth, to eliminate Anchor Baby status...

So, too, should those on the Left call for a reinterpretation of the Second, to better "regulate" our "militia" -at-large...

Then call for it. Who's stopping you? What do you suppose the decision would be with the Supreme Court we have now?

I have no power to do so.

As to the Supreme Court, that's a very good question.

The thing about a lifetime appointment is... once you're "in", you don't have to worry about partisan politics any longer.

We routinely see our now-conservative-leaning SCOTUS serving-up surprisingly contrary decisions... swing-votes and all that, eh?

It will take someone with far more power and legal skills than I possess, to bring-on that challenge.

And, you're right, it might very well face an uphill battle in any SCOTUS hearing.

Yet, the challenge will come, and if not now, sometime soon (as history measures time), as more thousands of innocent Americans die.

That does not, in the meantime, prevent ordinary American citizens from advocating for such an effort - as we see here.

You are wrong. Anybody who believes their rights have been violated can challenge that offense in a court, and yes, right up to the Supreme Court if they decide to hear the case.

As far as conservative judges go, they come up with some pretty disappointing rulings on matters most if not all conservatives are against. It was just earlier this month they (including Kavanaugh) decided not to hear the case against Planned Parenthood. Prior to that, it was backstabbing Roberts that ushered in Commie Care.

You would be hard pressed to find a Democrat appointed judge rule in favor of a conservative initiative. There may be a few cases regarding firearms, but on the other hand, they don't have enough justices to make a difference in our rights to guns. God forbid if we ever had a left-leaning Supreme Court.

 

[pismoe]

off the top of my head i am thinking that 'kavanaugh' may be a lib in reality . 'roberts' seems to be scum , see his mandate that he forced