US Appeals court upholds Marylands unconstitutional ban on scary guns

[Pete7469]

I assumed that. You know as well as I do that libturds who parrot "right of the militia"

United States v Miller USSC 1939

Heller.

Individual right.

That's it.

Assuming you ignored "The Right of the People"

 

[Pete7469]

Miller said the people did not have a right to non-military weapons, which would be a "well regulated militia" read of the 2nd amendment. Heller completely repudiated that clause, and made it an individual right, instead of a communal one.

So in other words the Miller decision gave the "privilege" to a government controlled collective, and Heller returned us to the intent of the second amendment where we have the right to own military weapons.

Glad that was over turned. I'm looking forward to building a suppressed 20 gauge folding stock pistol.

 

[rich stacy]

She was not a New York resident. She was just passing through. She did not use the firearms in any crime nor was there an intent to do so. She should not have been considered a criminal for possession of firearms that was legal for her to own. The SAFE Act sucks. It was passed by batshit crazy unreasonable Liberals.

A reasonable police officer would have told her the law and then sent her on her way.

You want the police officer to ignore the law? Do you live in a sanctuary city?

 

[Pete7469]

You want the police officer to ignore the law? Do you live in a sanctuary city?

Sanctuary from leftist tyranny? That's entirely different than enforcing immigration law.

 

[rich stacy]

So in other words the Miller decision gave the "privilege" to a government controlled collective, and Heller returned us to the intent of the second amendment where we have the right to own military weapons.

You have your arguments crossed. Miller gave a communal right to military weapons, Heller gave an individual right to sporting and defensive weapons Scalia specifically upheld the governments right to keep dangerous, ie strictly military, weapons out of the hands of individuals.

 

[rich stacy]

Sanctuary from leftist tyranny? That's entirely different than enforcing immigration law.

I do not have the wisdom to know which laws to follow and which laws to ignore.

 

[Flash]

She was not a New York resident. She was just passing through. She did not use the firearms in any crime nor was there an intent to do so. She should not have been considered a criminal for possession of firearms that was legal for her to own. The SAFE Act sucks. It was passed by batshit crazy unreasonable Liberals.

A reasonable police officer would have told her the law and then sent her on her way.

You want the police officer to ignore the law? Do you live in a sanctuary city?

I want the police to be reasonable.

The SAFE is unreasonable and it was unreasonable to arrest somebody that obviously didn't understand the law and was just passing through. She had not committed any crime with the firearms and there was no indication she was going to do so. Why should she be arrested simply for the mere possession of a firearm? That is dumb and oppressive, isn't it?

By the way, that filthy ass bitch Crooked Hillary certainly broke the law and she was let off the hook because the police (FBI) said she had no intent.

 

[Pete7469]

You have your arguments crossed. Miller gave a communal right to military weapons, Heller gave an individual right to sporting and defensive weapons Scalia specifically upheld the governments right to keep dangerous, ie strictly military, weapons out of the hands of individuals.

Here's the fundamental error in your entire program.

The Bill of Rights declares that The Right of the People to bear arms is granted to all men is granted by God. The authority the men who created the document and hence the nation believed they were working under.

Obscure and erroneous rulings by fallible men have no legal standing when they're in conflict with the COTUS.

Heller merely made that clearer, while judges had to explain the justification for regulations that separate our society from that of Peshawar.

 

[Pete7469]

I do not have the wisdom to know which laws to follow and which laws to ignore.

That's obvious.

 

[rich stacy]

The SAFE is unreasonable and it was unreasonable to arrest somebody that obviously didn't understand the law and was just passing through.

You sound like a serial killer sympathizer. Psychopaths don't believe what they're doing is wrong. But laws aren't intended to only apply to those who fully understand them.

 

[rich stacy]

By the way, that filthy ass bitch Crooked Hillary certainly broke the law and she was let off the hook because the police (FBI) said she had no intent.

John Hinckley shot the president, and was let off the hook. Intent, mens rea, is the core of determining criminal responsibility.

 

[rich stacy]

Here's the fundamental error in your entire program.

The Bill of Rights declares that The Right of the People to bear arms is granted to all men is granted by God. The authority the men who created the document and hence the nation believed they were working under.

The founding fathers mentioned several inalienable rights, principally life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All other rights also being god given, and only enumerated by man.

The right to bear arms can't be god given, if only two countries in the world put that right into their constitutions. Leaving 99% of the world godless.

 

[Pete7469]

Here's the fundamental error in your entire program.

The Bill of Rights declares that The Right of the People to bear arms is granted to all men is granted by God. The authority the men who created the document and hence the nation believed they were working under.

The founding fathers mentioned several inalienable rights, principally life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All other rights also being god given, and only enumerated by man.

The right to bear arms can't be god given, if only two countries in the world put that right into their constitutions. Leaving 99% of the world godless.

You do understand that The Declaration of Independence has nothing to do with the LAW right?

No... you don't. You don't even understand the concept of law.

 

[Flash]

By the way, that filthy ass bitch Crooked Hillary certainly broke the law and she was let off the hook because the police (FBI) said she had no intent.

John Hinckley shot the president, and was let off the hook. Intent, mens rea, is the core of determining criminal responsibility.

This lady didn't shoot anybody. She was arrested for something that is legal in most other parts of this country. That is because the SAFE Act is unreasonable and the officer didn't use any reasonable discretion. That is what happens with oppressive laws. This arrest is a great example of why we should never allow Liberals to have control over our Liberties.

Why should anybody ever be arrested for the mere possession of a firearm when the Bill of Rights clearly says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed? Shouldn't the crime be for what is illegally done with the firearm, not just for having the firearm?

Liberals are idiots, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

What is the attraction of an AR15 if it is no different from any other rifle of the same caliber?

I think probably just the magazine.

By the way, all "assault rifles" are modified so they can't be fired automatically before they are sold, as far as I know. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Despite claims to the contrary, the AR 15 is essentially a semi-auto M16, which has a selector to go from semi- to full. They take the same clip (magazine).

M-16s and AR-15s do not use clips. Your statement just outted you as an unreliable source.


You also forgot the M-4.

Does it upset smuthurt ashflakes when the non-pc word 'clip' is used? Does a gunner 'grammarnazi' stand ever ready at attention to shoot down all verbal 'error'?
Yes, an AR15 looks authentic to the other guys, shows how serious the bearer is. A mere semi-auto hunting rifle just doesn't say "ready to take on the U.S. Army" the way a replica M16 does.

Non-PC? It's just plain wrong and you would know that if you understood anything about weapons. It stands as a marker that the person's opinion is based on ignorance and should be summarily dismissed.

 

[rich stacy]

You do understand that The Declaration of Independence has nothing to do with the LAW right?

No... you don't. You don't even understand the concept of law.

While not leagally binding, it was written by the same people, with the same ideas, intentions and understandings.

 

[12icer]

Here's the fundamental error in your entire program.

The Bill of Rights declares that The Right of the People to bear arms is granted to all men is granted by God. The authority the men who created the document and hence the nation believed they were working under.

The founding fathers mentioned several inalienable rights, principally life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. All other rights also being god given, and only enumerated by man.

The right to bear arms can't be god given, if only two countries in the world put that right into their constitutions. Leaving 99% of the world godless.

Why cant the right to bear arms be given by GOD? ALL rights are given by God including the right of free choice. so praytell why can the right to bear arms be given to mankind at their births? No liberal bullshit will be accepted as it has all been shown as the pure fantasy of idiots.

 

[rich stacy]

This lady didn't shoot anybody. She was arrested for something that is legal in most other parts of this country.

Can a woman get a 2nd or 3rd trimester abortion in Texas, because it's legal in California? That's the argument you're giving, as a rejection of states rights.

 

[Pete7469]

John Hinckley shot the president, and was let off the hook. Intent, mens rea, is the core of determining criminal responsibility.

Meanwhile Mark David Chapman remains in prison in spite of having done the world a favor.

Fuck you.

 

[Pete7469]

Can a woman get a 2nd or 3rd trimester abortion in Texas, because it's legal in California? That's the argument you're giving, as a rejection of states rights.

All libturds should be aborted through the 269th trimester.

They're dependent on others for their entire lives, so they're never actually "human" right?