US Appeals court upholds Marylands unconstitutional ban on scary guns

[TNHarley]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

We are talking hundred million people verses MAYBE one million. You really think most of the military is going to drop bombs on civilians?

 

[eflatminor]

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

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

Sorry bucko, revolvers were absolutely carried by soldiers in many wars. A bb gun is all you'll get...and it can't be black or scary looking!

 

[Rustic]

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

Some people dont realize so called "assault weapons" are nothing more than sporting rifles...

 

[dcbl]

it can't be black or scary looking!

^ racist

 

[OldLady]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

We are talking hundred million people verses MAYBE one million. You really think most of the military is going to drop bombs on civilians?

I don't really follow you, and no, I DON'T think it will happen (in our lifetimes, anyway) but if it were to happen, your hunting rifle is not going to save you.

 

[martybegan]

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

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

Sorry bucko, revolvers were absolutely carried by soldiers in many wars. A bb gun is all you'll get...and it can't be black or scary looking!

Actually BB guns are sort of illegal in NYC as well.

 

[eflatminor]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

Boy do you miss the point. It isn't one guy, it's millions, some of whom may very well be employed by federal, state and local governments. Stated differently, we have avoided real tyranny here because citizens, soldiers and cops alike have their own firearms at home, which we're all prepared to use.

 

[there4eyeM]

Unreasonable attachment to excessive firepower will lead to reaction and control. Reasoned compromise will achieve reasonable results.

 

[TNHarley]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

We are talking hundred million people verses MAYBE one million. You really think most of the military is going to drop bombs on civilians?

I don't really follow you, and no, I DON'T think it will happen (in our lifetimes, anyway) but if it were to happen, your hunting rifle is not going to save you.

There are probably a third of the country that would fight the govt it went completely insane. There are 4 million (roughly) in the service. Most of them aren't going to fire on us. Some people take their oaths seriously.
100M hunting rifles absolutely WOULD make a difference.

 

[OldLady]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

Boy do you miss the point. It isn't one guy, it's millions, some of whom may very well be employed by federal, state and local governments. Stated differently, we have avoided real tyranny here because citizens, soldiers and cops alike have their own firearms at home, which we're all prepared to use.

Seriously? You don't think the Constitution and our democracy have anything to do with it? We're all getting along because we're afraid the opposition party might shoot us?
I don't think so. Maybe where you live--and if so, I'm glad I don't live there.

 

[TNHarley]

Unreasonable attachment to excessive firepower will lead to reaction and control. Reasoned compromise will achieve reasonable results.

how do you compromise "shall not in infringed?"

 

[OldLady]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

We are talking hundred million people verses MAYBE one million. You really think most of the military is going to drop bombs on civilians?

I don't really follow you, and no, I DON'T think it will happen (in our lifetimes, anyway) but if it were to happen, your hunting rifle is not going to save you.

There are probably a third of the country that would fight the govt it went completely insane. There are 4 million (roughly) in the service. Most of them aren't going to fire on us. Some people take their oaths seriously.
100M hunting rifles absolutely WOULD make a difference.

Not against a tank, a drone or a missile, no, it won't.

 

[TNHarley]

When courts get to ignore the obvious, it is a threat to all of us. Progressives don't see that, because they would rather use the judicial "Easy Button" than the harder amendment process.

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

Sorry bucko, revolvers were absolutely carried by soldiers in many wars. A bb gun is all you'll get...and it can't be black or scary looking!

Actually BB guns are sort of illegal in NYC as well.

you got to be fucking joking

 

[eflatminor]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

Boy do you miss the point. It isn't one guy, it's millions, some of whom may very well be employed by federal, state and local governments. Stated differently, we have avoided real tyranny here because citizens, soldiers and cops alike have their own firearms at home, which we're all prepared to use.

Seriously? You don't think the Constitution and our democracy have anything to do with it? We're all getting along because we're afraid the opposition party might shoot us?
I don't think so. Maybe where you live--and if so, I'm glad I don't live there.

You mean the Constitution that guarantees our right to the means to defend ourselves against tyranny?

That one?

Thanks for making my point.

 

[TNHarley]

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

We are talking hundred million people verses MAYBE one million. You really think most of the military is going to drop bombs on civilians?

I don't really follow you, and no, I DON'T think it will happen (in our lifetimes, anyway) but if it were to happen, your hunting rifle is not going to save you.

There are probably a third of the country that would fight the govt it went completely insane. There are 4 million (roughly) in the service. Most of them aren't going to fire on us. Some people take their oaths seriously.
100M hunting rifles absolutely WOULD make a difference.

Not against a tank, a drone or a missile, no, it won't.

100M people scattered out among 4M miles? Lol...
For every gun, tank, missile etc, there are around 100 people.
Street by street, house by house. Not plausible. That's WHY the fascists want to restrict gun ownership in any way possible
"THERE CAN BE NO REVOLUTION WITHOUT AMMUNITION"

 

[OldLady]

There are restrictions on all rights, including the 2nd and the 1st. When we've got officially declared war on the streets of Maryland, I'd be willing to rethink this ruling.

by then it will be too late

the 2nd amendment was put into place so that citizens could check the power of the federal government; this ruling flies in the face of that intent

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

Boy do you miss the point. It isn't one guy, it's millions, some of whom may very well be employed by federal, state and local governments. Stated differently, we have avoided real tyranny here because citizens, soldiers and cops alike have their own firearms at home, which we're all prepared to use.

Seriously? You don't think the Constitution and our democracy have anything to do with it? We're all getting along because we're afraid the opposition party might shoot us?
I don't think so. Maybe where you live--and if so, I'm glad I don't live there.

You mean the Constitution that guarantees our right to the means to defend ourselves against tyranny?

That one?

Thanks for making my point.

You know what I meant, o clever one.
Tyranny has NOT been avoided because of guns in every closet. It has been avoided because of checks and balances and the people's right to a representative government.

 

[OldLady]

If you think you're going to stand up to the power of the federal government with an assault rifle (I'm guessing they mean AR-15 types? semi's actually?), I pity you.

We are talking hundred million people verses MAYBE one million. You really think most of the military is going to drop bombs on civilians?

I don't really follow you, and no, I DON'T think it will happen (in our lifetimes, anyway) but if it were to happen, your hunting rifle is not going to save you.

There are probably a third of the country that would fight the govt it went completely insane. There are 4 million (roughly) in the service. Most of them aren't going to fire on us. Some people take their oaths seriously.
100M hunting rifles absolutely WOULD make a difference.

Not against a tank, a drone or a missile, no, it won't.

100M people scattered out among 4M miles? Lol...
For every gun, tank, missile etc, there are around 100 people.
Street by street, house by house. Not plausible. That's WHY the fascists want to restrict gun ownership in any way possible
"THERE CAN BE NO REVOLUTION WITHOUT AMMUNITION"

I still don't get what in hell you're envisioning. I most likely would be happier not knowing. Leave it.

 

[martybegan]

Very true. The silver lining to this oppression is that once at the SCOTUS, it has the potential to bring down the national firearms act and all its fascist derivatives....

yes, hopefully they might start actually hearing this shit. There are 7 or 8 states that have similar infringements of liberty in place. Hopefully they all cease to exist.

Sooner or later they will get down to striking down the Sullivan Act in NYC, the one that makes me wait 6 months and pay $1000 or so in fees just to get a revolver to keep in my apartment.

Sorry bucko, revolvers were absolutely carried by soldiers in many wars. A bb gun is all you'll get...and it can't be black or scary looking!

Actually BB guns are sort of illegal in NYC as well.

you got to be fucking joking

You need a license for a fucking BB gun in NYC.

 

[Muhammed]

I hope these gun grabbers get their rights violated in a serious way. I hope they get their home searched without a warrant, get arrested for planted drugs and have their bank accounts home, vehicles and the rest of their property confiscated while they are locked up in a 10 x 6 concrete box wearing an orange Bob Barker jumpsuit until they die.

Maybe that would teach them the importance of the bill of rights.

 

[TNHarley]

We are talking hundred million people verses MAYBE one million. You really think most of the military is going to drop bombs on civilians?

I don't really follow you, and no, I DON'T think it will happen (in our lifetimes, anyway) but if it were to happen, your hunting rifle is not going to save you.

There are probably a third of the country that would fight the govt it went completely insane. There are 4 million (roughly) in the service. Most of them aren't going to fire on us. Some people take their oaths seriously.
100M hunting rifles absolutely WOULD make a difference.

Not against a tank, a drone or a missile, no, it won't.

100M people scattered out among 4M miles? Lol...
For every gun, tank, missile etc, there are around 100 people.
Street by street, house by house. Not plausible. That's WHY the fascists want to restrict gun ownership in any way possible
"THERE CAN BE NO REVOLUTION WITHOUT AMMUNITION"

I still don't get what in hell you're envisioning. I most likely would be happier not knowing. Leave it.

A revolution, OL. The whole point of the second.