"The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not 'a second-class right'"

So why are you for lies....
Speaking of lies: - here's a big one:

1665165131258.png


Keep trolling, liar-boy.
 
Last edited:
the courts say that guns can be regulated. That is no lie
The courts also said:

- The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
- 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,
- When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”

And, since you "will go with what courts and judges have said", you agree.

Right, liar-boy?
 
That;s because you aren't a competnt judge, troll-boy
and I would run my high school team that beat West Point in war game
The courts also said:

- The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
- 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,
- When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”

And, since you "will go with what courts and judges have said", you agree.

Right, liar-boy?
Nobody here is a liar, you are just misinformed and brainwashed with garbage propaganda. We have regulations and the courts are going along with them end of story.
 
and I would run my high school team that beat West Point in war game
No one is impressed by your lies.

Nobody here is a liar,
You said: "I will go with what courts and judges have said"
As you refuse to "go with" the court when it said...

-The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
- 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,
- When the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. To justify its regulation, the government may not simply posit that the regulation promotes an important interest. Rather, the government must demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”

....you are a liar.
 
Last edited:
You don't represent the majority who are in favour of gun control measures. Go play!
The majority of Canadians?

lol

You morons are digging your own graves by disarming yourselves.

The majority here in the US *likes* our guns and we're keeping them. We are the most heavily armed country in the whole entire world. There are three guns for every man, woman, and child. It's going to stay that way. We're just going to ignore the dumbass shit for brains retarded dimwits who believe in stripping us if our self defense capability.

Dude - pass all the damn laws you want, it won't matter. We laugh at your bleeding heart gun control bullshit. You're not going to disarm us. Not now, not ever.
 

"The constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not 'a second-class right'"​


Exactly. It's bloody nonsense. To speak in a free way with an idiot and to speak with an armed idiot prefers the opinion of armed idiots and not any form of truth.
 
The majority of Canadians?

lol

You morons are digging your own graves by disarming yourselves.

The majority here in the US *likes* our guns and we're keeping them. We are the most heavily armed country in the whole entire world. There are three guns for every man, woman, and child. It's going to stay that way. We're just going to ignore the dumbass shit for brains retarded dimwits who believe in stripping us if our self defense capability.

Dude - pass all the damn laws you want, it won't matter. We laugh at your bleeding heart gun control bullshit. You're not going to disarm us. Not now, not ever.
Actually a litle more than 1:1....and mainly BFMs with arsenals and gang bangers...Great job! Always good to have a gun around omg....
 
Says the liar.
  1. FBI Reports Spikes in Anti-Muslim, Anti-Semitic Incidents

    Nov 16, 2016 Though Jews remain the most frequent victims in America of hate crimes based on religion, the number of incidents against Muslims surged in 2015, according to newly released …
 

Forum List

Back
Top