Charles C.W. Cooke takes apart 4th Circuit gun ban ruling....

[2aguy]

Snowflakes hissyfitting again?

You fail to grasp the implications.

This forces a SCOTUS review. How do you think that will work out for you of the anti-civil liberties side? Gorsuch is solidly pro-Constitution.

We can hope that some of the left wing nuts retire too.....and that Trump puts another good justice in there....

 

[JakeStarkey]

The 4th makes the rule in this case.

It is following the appeals, so simply appeal it.

No...the Supreme Court makes the rules....and already did in Heller v. The District of Columbia.....

And it will again. I am glad that you think you should not have a recoiless rifle. You don't need a machine gun. Or a rocket launcher. Or mines.

Glad to see you growing up.

A machine gun is also a crew served weapon....a rifle with select fire is not...so a rifle that can fire semi, or fully automatic is allowed, since it can be carried by an individual.....

So you are saying only crew served weapons quality as "weapons of war"? Really.

 

[Winston]

Snowflakes hissyfitting again?

For someone that hates America so much, you sure don't mind people trying to take our only defense against those corrupt ***** away.

This is how absurd the 4th's ruling is......

A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

But wait, he can do the exact same thing with an M1 Garand, an actual (more powerful) military weapon that’s specifically exempted from Maryland’s ban.
As the dissent notes, under the majority’s reasoning, “it is legal in Maryland to possess a rifle that was actually used by our military on the battlefield, but illegal to possess a rifle never used by our military.”

Read more at: A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

OK, can we stop with the stupid already. Seriously, the whole OP is so totally full of shit it wouldn't pass as a basic first year law essay. Here is the deal, you can't get the self-defense right provided under Heller without sacrificing the military use provision that was common jurist prudence until Heller. In short, you gun nuts were too smart by half. Now you have a second amendment right to self-defense. But that is all you got. Can you demonstrate that an assault rifle is absolutely necessary for self-defense, that the loss of the right to an assault rifle somehow damages the right to self defense more than the damage caused by easy access to such weapons? Why no, you can get a shotgun for self-defense. You can get one of those precious little pistols for self-defense. So you can kiss your little assault rifles goodbye. Pretty soon, well you can use a stungun for self-defense. That will be all you have a "second amendment right" to have, a stungun, for your own personal self-defense.

And really, where is this bullshit that the second amendment was to give the people the right to overthrow the government. OK we going to give you people the right to bear arms because if the government gets out of hand, why you can use those arms to overthrow that government. But if you attempt to use arms to overthrow the government, we will hang your ass. That makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[2aguy]

The 4th makes the rule in this case.

It is following the appeals, so simply appeal it.

No...the Supreme Court makes the rules....and already did in Heller v. The District of Columbia.....

And it will again. I am glad that you think you should not have a recoiless rifle. You don't need a machine gun. Or a rocket launcher. Or mines.

Glad to see you growing up.

A machine gun is also a crew served weapon....a rifle with select fire is not...so a rifle that can fire semi, or fully automatic is allowed, since it can be carried by an individual.....

So you are saying only crew served weapons quality as "weapons of war"? Really.

No....I am saying and the Supreme Court said that that is not a category that disqualifies a from 2nd Amendment protection....that term was made up by the 4th Circuit and has no relevance to the 2nd Amendment....

 

[2aguy]

Snowflakes hissyfitting again?

For someone that hates America so much, you sure don't mind people trying to take our only defense against those corrupt ***** away.

This is how absurd the 4th's ruling is......

A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

But wait, he can do the exact same thing with an M1 Garand, an actual (more powerful) military weapon that’s specifically exempted from Maryland’s ban.
As the dissent notes, under the majority’s reasoning, “it is legal in Maryland to possess a rifle that was actually used by our military on the battlefield, but illegal to possess a rifle never used by our military.”

Read more at: A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

OK, can we stop with the stupid already. Seriously, the whole OP is so totally full of shit it wouldn't pass as a basic first year law essay. Here is the deal, you can't get the self-defense right provided under Heller without sacrificing the military use provision that was common jurist prudence until Heller. In short, you gun nuts were too smart by half. Now you have a second amendment right to self-defense. But that is all you got. Can you demonstrate that an assault rifle is absolutely necessary for self-defense, that the loss of the right to an assault rifle somehow damages the right to self defense more than the damage caused by easy access to such weapons? Why no, you can get a shotgun for self-defense. You can get one of those precious little pistols for self-defense. So you can kiss your little assault rifles goodbye. Pretty soon, well you can use a stungun for self-defense. That will be all you have a "second amendment right" to have, a stungun, for your own personal self-defense.

And really, where is this bullshit that the second amendment was to give the people the right to overthrow the government. OK we going to give you people the right to bear arms because if the government gets out of hand, why you can use those arms to overthrow that government. But if you attempt to use arms to overthrow the government, we will hang your ass. That makes no sense whatsoever.

No moron....you are wrong...the entire point of the 2nd Amendment was for armed conflict against the government......and Heller is the decided law, not the made up rule by the 4th Circuit....which goes against a prior Precedent that they themselves ruled on...


The standard is common use......and the AR-15 is the most commonely used rifle in this country asswipe.....

You have no idea what you are talking about....Please.......tell your mommy and daddy that you are not allowed to use the computer anymore..until you grow up...

 

[Winston]

Snowflakes hissyfitting again?

For someone that hates America so much, you sure don't mind people trying to take our only defense against those corrupt ***** away.

This is how absurd the 4th's ruling is......

A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

But wait, he can do the exact same thing with an M1 Garand, an actual (more powerful) military weapon that’s specifically exempted from Maryland’s ban.
As the dissent notes, under the majority’s reasoning, “it is legal in Maryland to possess a rifle that was actually used by our military on the battlefield, but illegal to possess a rifle never used by our military.”

Read more at: A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

OK, can we stop with the stupid already. Seriously, the whole OP is so totally full of shit it wouldn't pass as a basic first year law essay. Here is the deal, you can't get the self-defense right provided under Heller without sacrificing the military use provision that was common jurist prudence until Heller. In short, you gun nuts were too smart by half. Now you have a second amendment right to self-defense. But that is all you got. Can you demonstrate that an assault rifle is absolutely necessary for self-defense, that the loss of the right to an assault rifle somehow damages the right to self defense more than the damage caused by easy access to such weapons? Why no, you can get a shotgun for self-defense. You can get one of those precious little pistols for self-defense. So you can kiss your little assault rifles goodbye. Pretty soon, well you can use a stungun for self-defense. That will be all you have a "second amendment right" to have, a stungun, for your own personal self-defense.

And really, where is this bullshit that the second amendment was to give the people the right to overthrow the government. OK we going to give you people the right to bear arms because if the government gets out of hand, why you can use those arms to overthrow that government. But if you attempt to use arms to overthrow the government, we will hang your ass. That makes no sense whatsoever.

No moron....you are wrong...the entire point of the 2nd Amendment was for armed conflict against the government......and Heller is the decided law, not the made up rule by the 4th Circuit....which goes against a prior Precedent that they themselves ruled on...


The standard is common use......and the AR-15 is the most commonely used rifle in this country asswipe.....

You have no idea what you are talking about....Please.......tell your mommy and daddy that you are not allowed to use the computer anymore..until you grow up...

What a freakin moron. The second amendment was not about armed conflict against the government. They hung they culprits of Harper's Ferry, they didn't give them a pass because of the second amendment. The second amendment was about guns against the government, it was about guns FOR the government, when they needed them, like to put down a rebellion, not initiate one. You ever hear of the Whiskey Rebellion?

And if the AR-15 is the most commonly used rifle it shows the public has already gone to shit and doesn't deserve the second amendment. But I suppose a bunch of needle dicks parading around playing pretend soldier is your idea of a rebel group. That battle wouldn't last two days.

Here is the deal. Heller made the second amendment about individual self-defense. You can't possibly make the argument than an AR-15 is absolutely necessary for personal defense. And now since under Heller the second amendment is no longer about a "militia", there is no need for the public to own a weapon of any military use at all. Like I said, you gun nuts were too smart by half.

 

[2aguy]

Snowflakes hissyfitting again?

For someone that hates America so much, you sure don't mind people trying to take our only defense against those corrupt ***** away.

This is how absurd the 4th's ruling is......

A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

But wait, he can do the exact same thing with an M1 Garand, an actual (more powerful) military weapon that’s specifically exempted from Maryland’s ban.
As the dissent notes, under the majority’s reasoning, “it is legal in Maryland to possess a rifle that was actually used by our military on the battlefield, but illegal to possess a rifle never used by our military.”

Read more at: A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

OK, can we stop with the stupid already. Seriously, the whole OP is so totally full of shit it wouldn't pass as a basic first year law essay. Here is the deal, you can't get the self-defense right provided under Heller without sacrificing the military use provision that was common jurist prudence until Heller. In short, you gun nuts were too smart by half. Now you have a second amendment right to self-defense. But that is all you got. Can you demonstrate that an assault rifle is absolutely necessary for self-defense, that the loss of the right to an assault rifle somehow damages the right to self defense more than the damage caused by easy access to such weapons? Why no, you can get a shotgun for self-defense. You can get one of those precious little pistols for self-defense. So you can kiss your little assault rifles goodbye. Pretty soon, well you can use a stungun for self-defense. That will be all you have a "second amendment right" to have, a stungun, for your own personal self-defense.

And really, where is this bullshit that the second amendment was to give the people the right to overthrow the government. OK we going to give you people the right to bear arms because if the government gets out of hand, why you can use those arms to overthrow that government. But if you attempt to use arms to overthrow the government, we will hang your ass. That makes no sense whatsoever.

No moron....you are wrong...the entire point of the 2nd Amendment was for armed conflict against the government......and Heller is the decided law, not the made up rule by the 4th Circuit....which goes against a prior Precedent that they themselves ruled on...


The standard is common use......and the AR-15 is the most commonely used rifle in this country asswipe.....

You have no idea what you are talking about....Please.......tell your mommy and daddy that you are not allowed to use the computer anymore..until you grow up...

What a freakin moron. The second amendment was not about armed conflict against the government. They hung they culprits of Harper's Ferry, they didn't give them a pass because of the second amendment. The second amendment was about guns against the government, it was about guns FOR the government, when they needed them, like to put down a rebellion, not initiate one. You ever hear of the Whiskey Rebellion?

And if the AR-15 is the most commonly used rifle it shows the public has already gone to shit and doesn't deserve the second amendment. But I suppose a bunch of needle dicks parading around playing pretend soldier is your idea of a rebel group. That battle wouldn't last two days.

Here is the deal. Heller made the second amendment about individual self-defense. You can't possibly make the argument than an AR-15 is absolutely necessary for personal defense. And now since under Heller the second amendment is no longer about a "militia", there is no need for the public to own a weapon of any military use at all. Like I said, you gun nuts were too smart by half.

Moron...do you understand that the Bill of Rights was not to define the Rights of the government...but to define the Rights of the Citizens...

The AR-15 is the most commonly owned rifle in the United States.....and it is used for self defense...and other activities...there is no reason to prohibit ownership considering the fact that knives in this country murder more peoeple....over 1,500 every year.....and that all rifles combined....kill about 200 every year....

Knives are more dangeroud than AR-15s so why don't you call for banning knives.....?

Moron...every weapon has been used by the military...

Flintlock rifles...military weapon.

Lever action rifles...military weapon.

Bolt action rifle...Military weapon.

Pump action shot gun...military weapon.

6 shot revolver...military weapon.

Colt M1911 pistol...7 round magazine...military weapon...so the 10 round magazine limit would be invalid as well.

All of those weapons would now be subject to banning and not protected by the 2nd Amendment after the 4th Circuit made up a category of weapons not protected by the 2nd Amendment....and Heller already told them they can't do this....

 

[2aguy]

This was the problem with obama....he has put anti gun judges on the court...which means democrats don't have to vote for gun control......

 

[Fenton Lum]

Snowflakes hissyfitting again?

For someone that hates America so much, you sure don't mind people trying to take our only defense against those corrupt ***** away.

Look, I don't hate anything; this is just how totalitarian and myopic the collective american mindset has become. If one questions anything, he must hate it, yet clearly many things about american society, its economic system and its power structure are long overdue for questioning. The “you hate america” nonsense is an effort to quiet dissent lest it spread; perhaps not on your part here, but certainly on the part of the corporate state. As I’ve stated many times, I own, I am permitted to carry. I just don’t worship the gun as a symbol of “freedom”; this fetishization of firearms as liberty is an illusion. The time when the american public might have taken on the government with their personal weapons has long since passed. Your government drones hominids, including american citizens, off the face of the planet from miles away and the american public is the most governmentally spied upon population on the planet; more so than China, Russia, or North Korea.

If we ever truly decide to take on this corrupt system and power structure we will first have to democratize the economic system. This is the tool by which the american public has been subjugated into a sharecropper’s existence. All this other stuff is how the power structure keeps the masses anxious, confused, incoherent, and quibbling amongst themselves so that the societal wealth extraction can continue unabated.

 

[Winston]

For someone that hates America so much, you sure don't mind people trying to take our only defense against those corrupt ***** away.

This is how absurd the 4th's ruling is......

A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

But wait, he can do the exact same thing with an M1 Garand, an actual (more powerful) military weapon that’s specifically exempted from Maryland’s ban.
As the dissent notes, under the majority’s reasoning, “it is legal in Maryland to possess a rifle that was actually used by our military on the battlefield, but illegal to possess a rifle never used by our military.”

Read more at: A Federal Court of Appeals Goes to War against the Second Amendment

OK, can we stop with the stupid already. Seriously, the whole OP is so totally full of shit it wouldn't pass as a basic first year law essay. Here is the deal, you can't get the self-defense right provided under Heller without sacrificing the military use provision that was common jurist prudence until Heller. In short, you gun nuts were too smart by half. Now you have a second amendment right to self-defense. But that is all you got. Can you demonstrate that an assault rifle is absolutely necessary for self-defense, that the loss of the right to an assault rifle somehow damages the right to self defense more than the damage caused by easy access to such weapons? Why no, you can get a shotgun for self-defense. You can get one of those precious little pistols for self-defense. So you can kiss your little assault rifles goodbye. Pretty soon, well you can use a stungun for self-defense. That will be all you have a "second amendment right" to have, a stungun, for your own personal self-defense.

And really, where is this bullshit that the second amendment was to give the people the right to overthrow the government. OK we going to give you people the right to bear arms because if the government gets out of hand, why you can use those arms to overthrow that government. But if you attempt to use arms to overthrow the government, we will hang your ass. That makes no sense whatsoever.

No moron....you are wrong...the entire point of the 2nd Amendment was for armed conflict against the government......and Heller is the decided law, not the made up rule by the 4th Circuit....which goes against a prior Precedent that they themselves ruled on...


The standard is common use......and the AR-15 is the most commonely used rifle in this country asswipe.....

You have no idea what you are talking about....Please.......tell your mommy and daddy that you are not allowed to use the computer anymore..until you grow up...

What a freakin moron. The second amendment was not about armed conflict against the government. They hung they culprits of Harper's Ferry, they didn't give them a pass because of the second amendment. The second amendment was about guns against the government, it was about guns FOR the government, when they needed them, like to put down a rebellion, not initiate one. You ever hear of the Whiskey Rebellion?

And if the AR-15 is the most commonly used rifle it shows the public has already gone to shit and doesn't deserve the second amendment. But I suppose a bunch of needle dicks parading around playing pretend soldier is your idea of a rebel group. That battle wouldn't last two days.

Here is the deal. Heller made the second amendment about individual self-defense. You can't possibly make the argument than an AR-15 is absolutely necessary for personal defense. And now since under Heller the second amendment is no longer about a "militia", there is no need for the public to own a weapon of any military use at all. Like I said, you gun nuts were too smart by half.

Moron...do you understand that the Bill of Rights was not to define the Rights of the government...but to define the Rights of the Citizens...

The AR-15 is the most commonly owned rifle in the United States.....and it is used for self defense...and other activities...there is no reason to prohibit ownership considering the fact that knives in this country murder more peoeple....over 1,500 every year.....and that all rifles combined....kill about 200 every year....

Knives are more dangeroud than AR-15s so why don't you call for banning knives.....?

Moron...every weapon has been used by the military...

Flintlock rifles...military weapon.

Lever action rifles...military weapon.

Bolt action rifle...Military weapon.

Pump action shot gun...military weapon.

6 shot revolver...military weapon.

Colt M1911 pistol...7 round magazine...military weapon...so the 10 round magazine limit would be invalid as well.

All of those weapons would now be subject to banning and not protected by the 2nd Amendment after the 4th Circuit made up a category of weapons not protected by the 2nd Amendment....and Heller already told them they can't do this....

Yes, the Bill of Rights is to define the rights of citizens. Including among those rights was the right to bear arms. But not so those arms could be used in an insurrection. Not even so those arms could be used for individual self-defense. But the amendment specifically mentions Militia--it was important to the founders that each state had a militia to be used in defense of that state. The reality is that arming the Continental Army as well as state militia units was a huge problem for the newly formed Republic. And it was French muskets that won the war, not the Kentucky long rifle. Hell, I figure it is a save bet that more British soldiers were killed with weapons seized from Tories than weapons bought from home. Tories not have second amendment rights?

So the amendment was once about the militia. Then you could make a strong argument that a ban on the assault rifle is a violation of the second amendment. But Heller changed that. It is not a collective right, it is an individual right. It is not based on the arming of a militia, for whatever damn purpose. The founders just threw that part about the militia in for shits and giggles. It is about an individual right, to self-defense. So yeah, a whole CLASS of weapons, those absolutely necessary for the proper arming of a militia, that were once protected by the second amendment are now open to restrictions thanks to Heller. The only CLASS of weapons that Heller created protection for are those absolutely necessary for individual self defense.

So now, well you have to make the argument that a ban on the assault rifle significantly INFRINGES upon an individual right to self-defense. Hard to make that argument when "assault" is in the very name. The weapon is an offensive weapon by design. For personal home defense, it is a STUPID weapon. There are much better options.

Which brings us to knives. Yes, knives can kill people. Yes, some knives are more dangerous than others. And you know what, some knives are BANNED. You stupid shit. I reckon since we ban particular knives we can also ban particular guns. Oh wait, we already do that too. An assault weapon can be banned without violating the second amendment. Suck it up, that is the LAW after Heller. You stupid shits did it to yourselves.