2nd amendment case probably headed to SC

[JBond]

Why are you so scared?

only gun lovers have to "conceal" anything. well regulated militia, do not.

Not sure why you keep deflecting to the militia.

it is not a deflection, but a gambit that is being advanced; why are you so afraid of, open carry like well regulated militia?

Because then the criminals/left wingers, know who has a gun before they rob the store.........

do Only well regulated militia have be, "brave"?

Your lack of education combined with your inability to stay on topic is typical of your ilk.

I'll help you out.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

 

[Wyatt earp]

Police and well regulated militia, open carry, by custom and habit.

Oh really you never heard of Colombo or kojak?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

There is no "right" to carry concealed weapons enshrined within Amendment II. It is extremely doubtful SCOTUS would even grant certiorari to hear it given the nature of the case and the most recent precedents in Heller just 10 years ago.

Fail.

I am curious. Why do you care about how I carry my gun? Would you feel better if it was strapped to my thigh in plain sight? If so, why?

What's the FAIL? I could give a damn where your carry your weapon on your person as long as it's within the boundary of existing law, shit for brains. You're assuming too ******* much, hot shot! I do care about the rule of law, though!!!!

Can you cite precisely WHERE in Amendment II the right to carry concealed exists? Didn't ******* think so! I can cite from Heller EXACTLY where the very conservative Justice Scalia wrote that there were limits to the extent of Amendment II.

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."
~~ DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER ~~

So would Scalia, the champion of the RW, poorly hung, gun nut set, now be a gun grabber, too, if he were still alive? Damn but your faction is so ******* infantile when it comes to the symbols of your perceived collective manhood. If the 2A is mentioned, whine like little bitches, you will!

 

[danielpalos]

only gun lovers have to "conceal" anything. well regulated militia, do not.

Not sure why you keep deflecting to the militia.

it is not a deflection, but a gambit that is being advanced; why are you so afraid of, open carry like well regulated militia?

Because then the criminals/left wingers, know who has a gun before they rob the store.........

do Only well regulated militia have be, "brave"?

Your lack of education combined with your inability to stay on topic is typical of your ilk.

I'll help you out.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

10USC311 is federal law.

 

[JBond]

There is no "right" to carry concealed weapons enshrined within Amendment II. It is extremely doubtful SCOTUS would even grant certiorari to hear it given the nature of the case and the most recent precedents in Heller just 10 years ago.

Fail.

I am curious. Why do you care about how I carry my gun? Would you feel better if it was strapped to my thigh in plain sight? If so, why?

What's the FAIL? I could give a damn where your carry your weapon on your person as long as it's within the boundary of existing law, shit for brains. You're assuming too ******* much, hot shot! I do care about the rule of law, though!!!!

Can you cite precisely WHERE in Amendment II the right to carry concealed exists? Didn't ******* think so! I can cite from Heller EXACTLY where the very conservative Justice Scalia wrote that there were limits to the extent of Amendment II.

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."
~~ DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER ~~

So would Scalia, the champion of the RW, poorly hung, gun nut set, now be a gun grabber, too, if he were still alive? Damn but your faction is so ******* infantile when it comes to the symbols of your perceived collective manhood. If the 2A is mentioned, whine like little bitches, you will!

Another fail, despite the bold underlining. Where does it outlaw concealed carry?

Getting tired of duche bags that believe they should be the arbiter of who is allowed to defend themselves. Bunch of brainwashed punks.

 

[JBond]

Not sure why you keep deflecting to the militia.

it is not a deflection, but a gambit that is being advanced; why are you so afraid of, open carry like well regulated militia?

Because then the criminals/left wingers, know who has a gun before they rob the store.........

do Only well regulated militia have be, "brave"?

Your lack of education combined with your inability to stay on topic is typical of your ilk.

I'll help you out.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

10USC311 is federal law.

And?

10 U.S. Code § 311 - Exchange of defense personnel between United States and friendly foreign countries: authority

 

[danielpalos]

Police and well regulated militia, open carry, by custom and habit.

Oh really you never heard of Colombo or kojak?

not everyone is an inspector or a detective.

 

[danielpalos]

it is not a deflection, but a gambit that is being advanced; why are you so afraid of, open carry like well regulated militia?

Because then the criminals/left wingers, know who has a gun before they rob the store.........

do Only well regulated militia have be, "brave"?

Your lack of education combined with your inability to stay on topic is typical of your ilk.

I'll help you out.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

10USC311 is federal law.

And?

10 U.S. Code § 311 - Exchange of defense personnel between United States and friendly foreign countries: authority

did you know, nobody takes the right wing seriously about the law, or economics?

10 U.S.C. 311 - Militia: composition and classes

 

[JBond]

it is not a deflection, but a gambit that is being advanced; why are you so afraid of, open carry like well regulated militia?

Because then the criminals/left wingers, know who has a gun before they rob the store.........

do Only well regulated militia have be, "brave"?

Your lack of education combined with your inability to stay on topic is typical of your ilk.

I'll help you out.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

10USC311 is federal law.

And?

10 U.S. Code § 311 - Exchange of defense personnel between United States and friendly foreign countries: authority

Thought you would like that. : )


My point is your obsession with the militia is misplaced.

 

[danielpalos]

Because then the criminals/left wingers, know who has a gun before they rob the store.........

do Only well regulated militia have be, "brave"?

Your lack of education combined with your inability to stay on topic is typical of your ilk.

I'll help you out.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER

10USC311 is federal law.

And?

10 U.S. Code § 311 - Exchange of defense personnel between United States and friendly foreign countries: authority

Thought you would like that. : )


My point is your obsession with the militia is misplaced.

My point is, the right wing is clueless and Causeless about the law in this Case.

 

[jon_berzerk]

There is no "right" to carry concealed weapons enshrined within Amendment II. It is extremely doubtful SCOTUS would even grant certiorari to hear it given the nature of the case and the most recent precedents in Heller just 10 years ago.

Well regulated militia don't need to carry concealed weapons, why do gun lovers?

Ok open carry will do.




.

indeed

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

There is no "right" to carry concealed weapons enshrined within Amendment II. It is extremely doubtful SCOTUS would even grant certiorari to hear it given the nature of the case and the most recent precedents in Heller just 10 years ago.

Fail.

I am curious. Why do you care about how I carry my gun? Would you feel better if it was strapped to my thigh in plain sight? If so, why?

What's the FAIL? I could give a damn where your carry your weapon on your person as long as it's within the boundary of existing law, shit for brains. You're assuming too ******* much, hot shot! I do care about the rule of law, though!!!!

Can you cite precisely WHERE in Amendment II the right to carry concealed exists? Didn't ******* think so! I can cite from Heller EXACTLY where the very conservative Justice Scalia wrote that there were limits to the extent of Amendment II.

"Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."
~~ DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER ~~

So would Scalia, the champion of the RW, poorly hung, gun nut set, now be a gun grabber, too, if he were still alive? Damn but your faction is so ******* infantile when it comes to the symbols of your perceived collective manhood. If the 2A is mentioned, whine like little bitches, you will!

Another fail, despite the bold underlining. Where does it outlaw concealed carry?

Getting tired of duche bags that believe they should be the arbiter of who is allowed to defend themselves. Bunch of brainwashed punks.

Are you really that ******* stupid or are you just playing at it. I don't want to waste my time with either type of fool!

Heller, building upon the precedents in US v. Miller set the legal principle that, "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited." You don't like that LEGALLY BINDING PRINCIPLE, tough ******* shit and go pound sand, asshole! That's the guiding principle of the law of the land. If the law in San Diego limits concealed carry to specifics needs, it's the LAW THERE and likely meets the legal test, which is very unlikely to be heard by SCOTUS!

Getting tired of duche bags that believe they should be the arbiter of who is allowed to defend themselves.

If you weren't such a miserably offensive, ignorant piece of crap, you may not have need of a weapon to defend yourself, ya ******* jerk! Now go about thy way and haveth carnal relations with thyself!

 

[PredFan]

Scum McConnel works for the NRA, not the people ~ The NRA funds his worthless campaign

Why doesn't he just stay in the Fuc= Kentucky and stay the Fuc+ out of California..

I hate that crocked ass man

Way too much hate going on there sparky.

I hate McConnell too but the NRA is a great organization and I will continue to support it.

I think open areas with ranches and cowboys you would expect to see people carry guns..

But in the cities, it is not ok..like I said we have way too much road rage going on with the extreme high expense and traffic...

There are also some really dumb mistakes from people who do not know how to drive here.. Not ok for McConnel or the NRA to push their agenda on us..

You think road rage only happens in the big cities?

 

[Eaglewings]

Scum McConnel works for the NRA, not the people ~ The NRA funds his worthless campaign

Why doesn't he just stay in the Fuc= Kentucky and stay the Fuc+ out of California..

I hate that crocked ass man

Way too much hate going on there sparky.

I hate McConnell too but the NRA is a great organization and I will continue to support it.

I think open areas with ranches and cowboys you would expect to see people carry guns..

But in the cities, it is not ok..like I said we have way too much road rage going on with the extreme high expense and traffic...

There are also some really dumb mistakes from people who do not know how to drive here.. Not ok for McConnel or the NRA to push their agenda on us..

You think road rage only happens in the big cities?

I have been to the Midwest for a month last fall... it is a different world . People actually let you in or pass them..
Much different world out here in the Bay area

 

[PredFan]

Scum McConnel works for the NRA, not the people ~ The NRA funds his worthless campaign

Why doesn't he just stay in the Fuc= Kentucky and stay the Fuc+ out of California..

I hate that crocked ass man

Way too much hate going on there sparky.

I hate McConnell too but the NRA is a great organization and I will continue to support it.

I think open areas with ranches and cowboys you would expect to see people carry guns..

But in the cities, it is not ok..like I said we have way too much road rage going on with the extreme high expense and traffic...

There are also some really dumb mistakes from people who do not know how to drive here.. Not ok for McConnel or the NRA to push their agenda on us..

You think road rage only happens in the big cities?

I have been to the Midwest for a month last fall... it is a different world . People actually let you in or pass them..
Much different world out here in the Bay area

That's crazy talk. Road rage exists all over. I live in Orlando and I see it quite a bit. We carry guns here too.

You cannot seriously think it only happens in the big cities.

 

[Little-Acorn]

There is no "right" to carry concealed weapons enshrined within Amendment II.

When a liberal cannot defend his own agenda (happens a lot), they often use flat lies instead, and hope they can get someone to believe them anyway. This is a clear example.

"The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" doesn't mean only major bans. It means even little restrictions are forbidden. Such as requiring all weapons be visible.

This is protected by the 2nd amendment so that a criminal contemplating a shooting, mugging, rape etc., will know that some law-abiding person in the crowd is probably carrying a gun, and he won't know who or where. It's the most effective deterrent known to man.

Liberals have never explained why they want to take away such a useful deterrent to crime. But it was obviously intended by the people who wrote the 2nd.

BTW, keep in mind that even before the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution, it was already illegal for the Fed govt to restrict or ban firearms, including banning concealed carry. The Fed govt had NO powers at all, until the Constitution gave them to it. And it contains no mention of any power to restrict or ban weapons in any way - something that remains true to this day.

 

[Doc1]

Second Amendment case Peruta vs. California may be heading to Supreme Court

Anti Gun nut jobs just keep asking for an ass kicking....thank god for President Trump putting a conservative on the SC! We could be dealing with an extremist leftist if Clinton had won.

The mythology that americans will be free from an over reaching gubment on accounta we gots guns is fiction son; you're THE most incarcerated and surveilled population in the history of the planet. Your ISP providers sell your browsing histories, your "employer" can now demand your bloodwork for access to their "healthcare" plan, and legislation is in the works to expand that to them being able to demand your genetic profile; all of which can be traded and sold amongst the substantial people. Soon "employers" will access all of that information during the "background" check of job applicants. Americans lack the nads to stand up to this, with or without guns.

You still pissed that we beat your asses two centuries back? C'mon man, get over it.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

There is no "right" to carry concealed weapons enshrined within Amendment II.

When a liberal cannot defend his own agenda (happens a lot), they often use flat lies instead, and hope they can get someone to believe them anyway. This is a clear example.

"The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" doesn't mean only major bans. It means even little restrictions are forbidden. Such as requiring all weapons be visible.

This is protected by the 2nd amendment so that a criminal contemplating a shooting, mugging, rape etc., will know that some law-abiding person in the crowd is probably carrying a gun, and he won't know who or where. It's the most effective deterrent known to man.

Liberals have never explained why they want to take away such a useful deterrent to crime. But it was obviously intended by the people who wrote the 2nd.

BTW, keep in mind that even before the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution, it was already illegal for the Fed govt to restrict or ban firearms, including banning concealed carry. The Fed govt had NO powers at all, until the Constitution gave them to it. And it contains no mention of any power to restrict or ban weapons in any way - something that remains true to this day.

Damn, you're an ignorant, unwashed fool! Refer to my posts #64 & #78, then read the following excerpts from DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER to cement it in your mind;

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues.

AND;

Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.26

Now are you going to claim you know more about the absolutist view of infringement of Amendment II than Justice Scalia who wrote the decision in Heller, including those words quoted above or admit you are wrong? Tribal knowledge can be very misleading, fool!

 

[Eaglewings]

Way too much hate going on there sparky.

I hate McConnell too but the NRA is a great organization and I will continue to support it.

I think open areas with ranches and cowboys you would expect to see people carry guns..

But in the cities, it is not ok..like I said we have way too much road rage going on with the extreme high expense and traffic...

There are also some really dumb mistakes from people who do not know how to drive here.. Not ok for McConnel or the NRA to push their agenda on us..

You think road rage only happens in the big cities?

I have been to the Midwest for a month last fall... it is a different world . People actually let you in or pass them..
Much different world out here in the Bay area

That's crazy talk. Road rage exists all over. I live in Orlando and I see it quite a bit. We carry guns here too.

You cannot seriously think it only happens in the big cities.

Predfan have you been to the Bay area? You have no idea the large amounts of foreign people coming in to work in the Hi-Tech..and don't know how to drive here

Now Florida did made the rode-rage list..for a gun shot to a driver..but San Francisco bay area tops the list..

Florida:
1 Miami

In February of 2017, a man was shot in the face during an episode of road rage. The reason? He honked at a truck that wasn’t following traffic rules. Although the man made it out of the ordeal alive, this is definitely one of the worst road rage incidents you’ll find! Miami isn’t always this violent on the road, but it still earns the top spot for road rage in the United States.

10 San Francisco

Poor California earns not one but three spots on the worst road rage list! Somebody needs to get this state some anger management classes (and better traffic systems). The roads of San Francisco are not known for being particularly friendly and easy to navigate, so it’s little wonder that it falls into the top ten worst road rage cities in the United States. Commuters have to deal with this every single day, and apparently they don’t enjoy spending so much time on the road with their fellow drivers.

U.S. Cities with the Worst Road Rage

 

[Fenton Lum]

Second Amendment case Peruta vs. California may be heading to Supreme Court

Anti Gun nut jobs just keep asking for an ass kicking....thank god for President Trump putting a conservative on the SC! We could be dealing with an extremist leftist if Clinton had won.

The mythology that americans will be free from an over reaching gubment on accounta we gots guns is fiction son; you're THE most incarcerated and surveilled population in the history of the planet. Your ISP providers sell your browsing histories, your "employer" can now demand your bloodwork for access to their "healthcare" plan, and legislation is in the works to expand that to them being able to demand your genetic profile; all of which can be traded and sold amongst the substantial people. Soon "employers" will access all of that information during the "background" check of job applicants. Americans lack the nads to stand up to this, with or without guns.

You still pissed that we beat your asses two centuries back? C'mon man, get over it.

Oh I was born and raised here padnah, as amurkan as you are. I've had over 6 decades to study this bullshit and the divide between the lofty corporate state rhetoric versus the objective reality on the ground for "the people" who are nothing but commodites and packets of information for the substantial people to trade upon and exploit. Your system is just as authoritarian as any out there.