US Appeals court upholds Marylands unconstitutional ban on scary guns

[Wry Catcher]

The NRA and the Conservative Movement have become terrorist organizations.

What, no zombies? At conservative confab, NRA’s LaPierre lists threats to civilization, starting with the media

The first thing despots and oligarchs do is put together an enemies list.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

Weapons of war? Is the appeals court retarded? AR15's are not being used in any war by any branch of our military.

Personally I don't own an AR15 "assault" rifle, I own an AR15 defense rifle. If some murderous home invader punks break into my house I'll use the same rifles and pistols law enforcement use to protect themselves from these punks.

Mine is an AR style hog gun, it has an inferred scope because those suckers show up at night. So maybe a better name for it is a utility rifle, they have many uses.

These gun control assholes LIE that's my big issue with them. They can't make their case without lying, or they have no case without lying maybe that's why the lie. There was one of those assholes on ABC claiming the Sandyhook shooter used a full auto rifle which was a blatant lie.

That's what an ends justify the means mentality gets you. They attempt to redefine terms and control the narrative, accuracy means nothing. The incitement of emotions is their primary weapon. Rational people that look at the facts are their worse enemy and they will treat them as such.

"WASHINGTON —The House of Representatives approved its first effort of the new Congress to roll back gun regulations, voting to overturn a rule that would bar gun ownership by some who have been deemed mentally impaired by the Social Security Administration.

"The House voted 235-180 largely along party lines Thursday to repeal an Obama-era rule requiring the Social Security Administration to send records of some beneficiaries to the federal firearms background check system after they’ve been deemed mentally incapable of managing their financial affairs."

After the shooting of Congress Women Gabby Giffords there was a call by the NRA that gun control was bad, but keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill was good.

Now, the NRA supports efforts to do what they claimed was appropriate, and once again members of the GOP Caucus in Congress put their job security before common sense.

Yup and all that's worked so well for Democrats that they are winning across the US, oh wait no their not they are getting their asses handed to them.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Weapons of war? Is the appeals court retarded? AR15's are not being used in any war by any branch of our military.

Personally I don't own an AR15 "assault" rifle, I own an AR15 defense rifle. If some murderous home invader punks break into my house I'll use the same rifles and pistols law enforcement use to protect themselves from these punks.

Mine is an AR style hog gun, it has an inferred scope because those suckers show up at night. So maybe a better name for it is a utility rifle, they have many uses.

These gun control assholes LIE that's my big issue with them. They can't make their case without lying, or they have no case without lying maybe that's why the lie. There was one of those assholes on ABC claiming the Sandyhook shooter used a full auto rifle which was a blatant lie.

That's what an ends justify the means mentality gets you. They attempt to redefine terms and control the narrative, accuracy means nothing. The incitement of emotions is their primary weapon. Rational people that look at the facts are their worse enemy and they will treat them as such.

"WASHINGTON —The House of Representatives approved its first effort of the new Congress to roll back gun regulations, voting to overturn a rule that would bar gun ownership by some who have been deemed mentally impaired by the Social Security Administration.

"The House voted 235-180 largely along party lines Thursday to repeal an Obama-era rule requiring the Social Security Administration to send records of some beneficiaries to the federal firearms background check system after they’ve been deemed mentally incapable of managing their financial affairs."

After the shooting of Congress Women Gabby Giffords there was a call by the NRA that gun control was bad, but keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill was good.

Now, the NRA supports efforts to do what they claimed was appropriate, and once again members of the GOP Caucus in Congress put their job security before common sense.

Yup and all that's worked so well for Democrats that they are winning across the US, oh wait no their not they are getting their asses handed to them.

Sadly you're half correct. We have seen the same results in other places, where most of the people are fooled all of the time, such as in the South of our own nation, circa 1861. There where most of people sent their sons into battle, and their children never come home again (walk the fields of battle and see the graves if you think this is funny).

 

[xyz]

Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war

You have NO POWER TO DENY 2nd Amendment protection to ANY WEAPON carried by an individual.


.

Like anti-tank weapons, mortars, hand grenades, etc. Really?

The NRA and the Conservative Movement have become terrorist organizations.

What, no zombies? At conservative confab, NRA’s LaPierre lists threats to civilization, starting with the media

The first thing despots and oligarchs do is put together an enemies list.

Yeah, I'm not sure about the NRA, they don't support black legal gun-owners when the police attacks them for it.

 

[danielpalos]

Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war

You have NO POWER TO DENY 2nd Amendment protection to ANY WEAPON carried by an individual.


.

Only well regulated militia enjoy that literal protection due to their being Necessary.

Yeah....that is old...considering how many times you have been shown to be wrong.....and by the Supreme Court no less...

appealing to ignorance of the law, proves nothing.

 

[danielpalos]

Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war

You have NO POWER TO DENY 2nd Amendment protection to ANY WEAPON carried by an individual.


.

Only well regulated militia enjoy that literal protection due to their being Necessary.

Your safe space has made you delusional…

Projecting much, from the comfort and safety of politics, instead of the law?

 

[danielpalos]

U.S. appeals court upholds Maryland's ban on assault rifles
A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld Maryland's ban on assault rifles, ruling gun owners are not protected under the U.S. Constitution to possess "weapons of war," court documents showed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit decided 10-4 that the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, a law in response to the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, by a gunman with an assault rifle, does not violate the right to bear arms within the Second Amendment.
"Put simply, we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war," Judge Robert King wrote

---------
Extend it? WTF is that supposed to mean?
I assume, for the sake of consistency and honor, those same people also don't think the first applies to the internet and phones? You know, because they cant "extend it?"
Or maybe any religion developed after 1787, doesn't get the same rights as one developed pre-Constitution?
IDK maybe that's not what it means

The whole point of the second amendment was to allow citizens to have weapons of war. You don't maintain a free State with pop guns.

not when gun lovers refuse to be necessary to the security of a free State by mustering.

When was the last time they were asked to?

all they need do, is volunteer, dear.

I did, I carry a military ID so STFU.

The regular military is not the militia.

 

[danielpalos]

These gun control assholes LIE that's my big issue with them. They can't make their case without lying, or they have no case without lying maybe that's why the lie. There was one of those assholes on ABC claiming the Sandyhook shooter used a full auto rifle which was a blatant lie.

That's what an ends justify the means mentality gets you. They attempt to redefine terms and control the narrative, accuracy means nothing. The incitement of emotions is their primary weapon. Rational people that look at the facts are their worse enemy and they will treat them as such.

"WASHINGTON —The House of Representatives approved its first effort of the new Congress to roll back gun regulations, voting to overturn a rule that would bar gun ownership by some who have been deemed mentally impaired by the Social Security Administration.

"The House voted 235-180 largely along party lines Thursday to repeal an Obama-era rule requiring the Social Security Administration to send records of some beneficiaries to the federal firearms background check system after they’ve been deemed mentally incapable of managing their financial affairs."

After the shooting of Congress Women Gabby Giffords there was a call by the NRA that gun control was bad, but keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill was good.

Now, the NRA supports efforts to do what they claimed was appropriate, and once again members of the GOP Caucus in Congress put their job security before common sense.

It should have included the VA, bureaucrats are not judges and have no authority to remove anyones constitutional rights for any reason. If someone is truly mentally ill to the point they present a danger to others, take them to court and have them adjudicated as such. Why do you want to deny your fellow citizens due process?

Because the truly dangerous mentally ill are not obvious, as can be seen by the events of the last couple of decades.

Millions of law abiding citizens should have their 2nd amendment rights taken away because a handful of crazy nut jobs might go on a shooting spree?

they do it in an arbitrary and capricious manner, with drugs.

 

[danielpalos]

it should only come up, if you have to defend your rights in Court.

I believe inalienable rights were invented by gun lovers say they could keep their peashooters. Where did you get your definition from? Is it written into law somewhere? I like killing cats. It makes me happy. I do it privately and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy and safe. I like beating up cripples. It makes me happy. I like this inalienable right thing....

Natural rights are recognized (pre-existing rights) and secured in State Constitutions, and available via Due Process.

 

[2aguy]

The NRA and the Conservative Movement have become terrorist organizations.

What, no zombies? At conservative confab, NRA’s LaPierre lists threats to civilization, starting with the media

The first thing despots and oligarchs do is put together an enemies list.

And obama made that list conservative groups and Fox...except unlike Trump, obama actually used the federal government against them...the IRS, the EPA and the other alphabet agencies attacked them....not to forget wiretapping the Fox Reporter and getting his hands on the A.P. information...

 

[danielpalos]

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.

Hardly anyone sells or owns assault rifles, which have a specific definition that gun grabbers conveniently forget.

from a practical perspective; full auto would simply use up a lot of ammunition. do gun lovers, also stockpile ammo making supplies, in case of any "zombie apocalypse?

What people do with their firearms and ammo is none of your fucking business… That's the problem with you progressives do you want to control everyone that you disagree with. People kill people not firearms. Progressivism is the most common disease in DC.

why have a war on drugs? drugs don't kill; people kill by overdosing.

 

[2aguy]

Just like these parasites insist obozocare is the (puke) "law of the land", except gun rights are sewn into the fabric of our founding no matter what servile collectivist sociopaths and their mindless drones regurgitate. Obozocare was an abortion from the start and will hopefully go away.

Heller v DC moved the gun rights envelope. Where US v Miller USSC 1939 granted the right to military weapons, Heller shifted the 2nd from a collective right, to an individual right. And in the process removed the military weapons granted by Miller.

These courses did not grant any Rights......they simply stated for the left wing anti-gunners what the Rights we already have, are......and it was always an individual Right....again..the Supreme Court had to tell the left they were wrong ........

It did no such thing...as I have posted with the Quotes from Heller......Heller affirms the right to carry weapons...that includes rifles and pistols....please....read Heller before you post...

 

[2aguy]

The arrest was totally bat shit crazy for nothing more than possession of a firearm when the Constitution of the United States clearly says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed..

Moon Bats are crazy as hell. They can't be trusted on anything.

Most gun owners are law abiding citizens. She was not. There are many cases of citizens getting trapped by outrageous gun laws, but they are the law none the less.

She was a law abiding gun owner.....unless she is a felon with an illegal gun, she was within her rights....this case needs to go to the Supreme Court...

 

[Rustic]

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.

Hardly anyone sells or owns assault rifles, which have a specific definition that gun grabbers conveniently forget.

from a practical perspective; full auto would simply use up a lot of ammunition. do gun lovers, also stockpile ammo making supplies, in case of any "zombie apocalypse?

What people do with their firearms and ammo is none of your fucking business… That's the problem with you progressives do you want to control everyone that you disagree with. People kill people not firearms. Progressivism is the most common disease in DC.

why have a war on drugs? drugs don't kill; people kill by overdosing.

True, but those drugs are coming over our southern border.

 

[danielpalos]

Only well regulated militia enjoy that literal protection due to their being Necessary.

You insipid parrots have been chanting that bullshit mindlessly for decades. Then you wonder why people ridicule you and reject your cults of personality. Turds like you empower sociopaths like Stalin, Hitler, Mao et al.

View attachment 114144

all y'all have, is nothing but fallacy.

 

[2aguy]

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.

No...Miller did not....

No....dangerous and unusual is not military weapons......a grenade is unusual and dangerous....while an AR-15, a civilian rifle is common and no more dangerous than any other rifle.....rifles which are protected by the 2nd Amendment.

 

[2aguy]

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.

You are wrong...Heller did not void military weapons....


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


Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people.” We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

-------
Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people.”

We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

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.

--------

-------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.

---

 

[2aguy]

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.

She was guilty of breaking a law written to trap her....she did not use the gun to commit an actual crime....it was a law created to create a law to be broken and punished...not a law meant to stop a violent crime against other people...

 

[danielpalos]

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.

federal law is federal law; only the right wing, never gets it.

 

[2aguy]

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.

Wrong......

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.

Nope...the Bill of Rights extends to all of the states.....killing a baby is and should be illegal from the start.