Assault Weapons Ban would be unconstitutional. "A State Militia must be maintained and well regulated"

[danielpalos]

you're misinformed Mexican

You are even more misinformed, Unitary government European.

you're the one that has been proven misinformed countless times

Maybe in Right-Wing fantasy where you are Always Right.

no MM every post you have made is up for all to see.
You're getting your ass handed to you.

Isn't right wing fantasy wonderful. No wonder people vote inclusive blue instead of exclusive red.

 

[danielpalos]

We have a republic that protects the rights of the individual that prevent's a democracy from depriving them of their individual rights.

Nothing to do with our Second Amendment.

well if that is the case you tried to cancel the second amendment right
******* MORON

Only fantastical right wingers say that. Smarty pants.

No you said it you antrights fascist

You only think that because you are illiterate, right winger.

 

[danielpalos]

well it sure in hell isn't you Mexicans or Indians

lol. It is you right wingers, even less.

MM short for moron Mexican
So tell me MM what in the **** does right wing have to do with who was in America first?

not y'all, that is for sure.

I am of Asian ancestry

Why so bigoted, right winger? You study under political chic?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

We have a republic that protects the rights of the individual that prevent's a democracy from depriving them of their individual rights.

Nothing to do with our Second Amendment.

well if that is the case you tried to cancel the second amendment right
******* MORON

Only fantastical right wingers say that. Smarty pants.

No you said it you antrights fascist

You only think that because you are illiterate, right winger.

no in your own words you show yourself to be an antirights fascist

 

[bigrebnc1775]

well it sure in hell isn't you Mexicans or Indians

lol. It is you right wingers, even less.

MM short for moron Mexican
So tell me MM what in the **** does right wing have to do with who was in America first?

not y'all, that is for sure.

I am of Asian ancestry

Why so bigoted, right winger? You study under political chic?

MM so you're a racist and an antirights fascist?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

you're misinformed Mexican

You are even more misinformed, Unitary government European.

you're the one that has been proven misinformed countless times

Maybe in Right-Wing fantasy where you are Always Right.

no MM every post you have made is up for all to see.
You're getting your ass handed to you.

Isn't right wing fantasy wonderful. No wonder people vote inclusive blue instead of exclusive red.

says the antirights fascist

 

[Rigby5]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

Because it is clearly outlined in our federal Constitution.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

but isn't the second amendment delegated to the United States by the Constitution?

 

[danielpalos]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

but isn't the second amendment delegated to the United States by the Constitution?

It is about the security of our free States not individual liberty. It says so in the first clause.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

Because it is clearly outlined in our federal Constitution.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

so congress needs to start handing out automatic weapons, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

 

[danielpalos]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

Because it is clearly outlined in our federal Constitution.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

so congress needs to start handing out automatic weapons, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Insist on getting organized.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

To the militia mobile!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

but isn't the second amendment delegated to the United States by the Constitution?

It is about the security of our free States not individual liberty. It says so in the first clause.

it's an individual protected right

The second clause states the directive
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

Because it is clearly outlined in our federal Constitution.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

so congress needs to start handing out automatic weapons, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Insist on getting organized.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

To the militia mobile!

we are organized under the unorganized militia
WE ARE COMING FOR YOU ANTIRIGHTS FASCIST

 

[danielpalos]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

but isn't the second amendment delegated to the United States by the Constitution?

It is about the security of our free States not individual liberty. It says so in the first clause.

it's an individual protected right

The second clause states the directive
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

That can't be true; otherwise, even criminals of the People could rob banks and the police would not be able to arrest them.

the right of (even) the (criminals of the) people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

 

[danielpalos]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

Because it is clearly outlined in our federal Constitution.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

so congress needs to start handing out automatic weapons, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Insist on getting organized.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

To the militia mobile!

we are organized under the unorganized militia
WE ARE COMING FOR YOU ANTIRIGHTS FASCIST

Not if I get into the organized militia and qualify for the heavy weapons section.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

but isn't the second amendment delegated to the United States by the Constitution?

It is about the security of our free States not individual liberty. It says so in the first clause.

it's an individual protected right

The second clause states the directive
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

That can't be true; otherwise, even criminals of the People could rob banks and the police would not be able to arrest them.

the right of (even) the (criminals of the) people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

that's what it says
OH that's right showing how illiterate you truly are
Robbing a bank is a crime, theft is a crime you antirights fascist

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

Because it is clearly outlined in our federal Constitution.

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

so congress needs to start handing out automatic weapons, the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

Insist on getting organized.

The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.

To the militia mobile!

we are organized under the unorganized militia
WE ARE COMING FOR YOU ANTIRIGHTS FASCIST

Not if I get into the organized militia and qualify for the heavy weapons section.

lol now that's funny

 

[danielpalos]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

but isn't the second amendment delegated to the United States by the Constitution?

It is about the security of our free States not individual liberty. It says so in the first clause.

it's an individual protected right

The second clause states the directive
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

That can't be true; otherwise, even criminals of the People could rob banks and the police would not be able to arrest them.

the right of (even) the (criminals of the) people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

that's what it says
OH that's right showing how illiterate you truly are
Robbing a bank is a crime, theft is a crime you antirights fascist

lol. In other words, no right to keep and bear Arms for the Unorganized militia.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

No, it isn't. It is about the security of our free States. It says so in the first clause.

The security of our free States demands in no uncertain terms that the RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State--that is what is demanded by a State.

How can you have a free state or any free states if there federal gun control over them?
The 9th and 10th amendments are clear, there can be no federal gun control because no article in the constitution authorizes that.

but isn't the second amendment delegated to the United States by the Constitution?

It is about the security of our free States not individual liberty. It says so in the first clause.

it's an individual protected right

The second clause states the directive
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed

That can't be true; otherwise, even criminals of the People could rob banks and the police would not be able to arrest them.

the right of (even) the (criminals of the) people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

that's what it says
OH that's right showing how illiterate you truly are
Robbing a bank is a crime, theft is a crime you antirights fascist

lol. In other words, no right to keep and bear Arms for the Unorganized militia.

the people are the unorganized militia