MASS SHOOTING (Low level/Few) in Harford County, suspect on the loose!

[2aguy]

Who wants to take away all the guns. Who?

liberals, all of them...what now, if I can't name all of them you feel vindicated?

So you cannot point to any significant number of significant efforts to confiscate guns. Tough to be you.

The 4th Circuit Court of appeals just ruled that weapons useful for the military can be banned.....the gun grabbers are using the courts instead of elected officials to pass their gun control.

So SCOTUS will have to decide: all weapons of war (you will be crappin' shell cartridges), no weapons of war (you get a missile frigate for your marina); or various weapons left to the state leges to decide.

They already decided in Heller, the 4th and the 9th are ignoring the ruling in Heller....

 

[2aguy]

Frankie, identify significant efforts to confiscate guns. You can't.

Now get back on thread, or the opposition here will keep kicking your butt, rhetorically of course.

Since you can't be intellectually honest, I will save you the pain. You are on ignore.

The New York Safe Act, the California magazine ban..which will ban many types of pistol and rifle...

But is that confiscation of all weapons, or certain sorts of weapons.

Horation, you don't get your own frigate.

Heller explained it...

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

------------------------

Page 21...

Thus, the right secured in 1689 as a result of the Stuarts’ abuses was by the time of the founding understood to be an individual right protecting against both public and private violence.

--------------




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

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.

---








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.
----------


I don't think a missile frigate is a bearable arm....

 

[OnePercenter]

Where did he get the gun?

 

[2aguy]

Where did he get the gun?

Still waiting for the info. If you find it, make sure you post it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Who wants to take away all the guns. Who?

liberals, all of them...what now, if I can't name all of them you feel vindicated?

So you cannot point to any significant number of significant efforts to confiscate guns. Tough to be you.

The 4th Circuit Court of appeals just ruled that weapons useful for the military can be banned.....the gun grabbers are using the courts instead of elected officials to pass their gun control.

So SCOTUS will have to decide: all weapons of war (you will be crappin' shell cartridges), no weapons of war (you get a missile frigate for your marina); or various weapons left to the state leges to decide.

They already decided in Heller, the 4th and the 9th are ignoring the ruling in Heller....

Well, that is your opinion.

SCOTUS will decide.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

liberals, all of them...what now, if I can't name all of them you feel vindicated?

So you cannot point to any significant number of significant efforts to confiscate guns. Tough to be you.

The 4th Circuit Court of appeals just ruled that weapons useful for the military can be banned.....the gun grabbers are using the courts instead of elected officials to pass their gun control.

So SCOTUS will have to decide: all weapons of war (you will be crappin' shell cartridges), no weapons of war (you get a missile frigate for your marina); or various weapons left to the state leges to decide.

They already decided in Heller, the 4th and the 9th are ignoring the ruling in Heller....

Well, that is your opinion.

SCOTUS will decide.

lol...the "just say anything defense"