Free? That Is A Laugh.

[WinterBorn]

If it were not an individual right, why didn't they SCOTUS rule that individuals couldn't buy machine guns back in the 1930s?

It has not been ruled on between the 1930s and 2008. So the chances of you getting judicial fiat to work in your favor might take 75 years or so. lol

Actually, it will happen 10 minutes after Scalia takes a dirt nap and Hillary appoints his replacement.

First you have got to get Hillary elected. She is carrying a lot of baggage.

Then you have to get a case to be heard by the SCOTUS. Something that, on this topic, is exceedingly rare.

 

[WinterBorn]

And Joey, you keep talking about "common sense gun laws".

But what you want is far from common sense.

You have ranted about wanting people shot for what they believe.

You have ranted about wanting people sent to prison or bankrupted defending themselves, when they have broken no law.

You have gone on and on about how dangerous privately owned guns are, when the facts show that more than 99% of the privately owned guns are never used to harm anyone (except perhaps criminals).

You have expressed a desire to make hunting so expensive that only the rich can do it, thereby virtually bankrupting state conservation efforts and deny food banks and soup kitchens more than 1.9 million servings of healthy protein.

Your ideas are so far from reality as to be nonsensical. Even the Brady Bunch of anti-gun folks haven't said they want what you are suggesting. You are on the lunatic fringe.

 

[WinterBorn]

If it were not an individual right, why didn't they SCOTUS rule that individuals couldn't buy machine guns back in the 1930s?

It has not been ruled on between the 1930s and 2008. So the chances of you getting judicial fiat to work in your favor might take 75 years or so. lol

Actually, it will happen 10 minutes after Scalia takes a dirt nap and Hillary appoints his replacement.

And Ginsberg is older than Scalia, while Breyer is only 2 years younger than Scalia. It is as likely that the SCOTUS will lose an anti-gun nut as to lose Scalia.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"Many are startled to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own a gun until 2008, when District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the capital’s law effectively banning handguns in the home. In fact, every other time the court had ruled previously, it had ruled otherwise. Why such a head-snapping turnaround? Don’t look for answers in dusty law books or the arcane reaches of theory."

Interestingly, post-Heller Second Amendment jurisprudence has evolved to the point where most firearms regulatory measures have been upheld by state and local courts, save that of an outright ban of firearms.


The result is the exact opposite of what the Heller legal team sought to achieve: rather than uniform gun laws across the country, we instead have a fragmented patchwork of laws where the states are deciding what firearms their residents may possess and what firearms they may not.


This exposes the hypocrisy common to most on the right, of course, where conservatives incorrectly believe that the states have the 'right' to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law or deny women their right to privacy, but oppose the states having the 'right' to prohibit possession of certain firearms.


Conservative dogma is consequently inconsistent – if the residents of Utah have the 'right' to deny same-sex couples access to marriage law, then the residents of New York have the 'right' to ban AR 15s.


Or, if conservatives want to seek to have New York's Safe Act invalidated by the courts because it violates the Second Amendment, then they must also support invalidating Utah's Amendment 3 denying same-sex couples access to marriage law because it violates the 14th Amendment.


Conservatives can't have it both ways.


Given the fact, therefore, that the states do not have the 'right' to violate citizens' civil liberties, the Supreme Court should strike down both Utah's Amendment 3 and New York's Safe Act, as in the case with the latter, the AR 15 is clearly a weapon in common use, neither dangerous nor unusual, where its possession is entitled to Constitutional protections.

 

[JoeB131]

[

First you have got to get Hillary elected. She is carrying a lot of baggage.

Then you have to get a case to be heard by the SCOTUS. Something that, on this topic, is exceedingly rare.

Hillary will win by a landslide. Nobody who voted for Obama in 2012 is going to vote for one of your crazies next time, and a lot of White Suburban women who wouldn't vote for Obama just can't wait to vote for Hillary.

 

[JoeB131]

If it were not an individual right, why didn't they SCOTUS rule that individuals couldn't buy machine guns back in the 1930s?

It has not been ruled on between the 1930s and 2008. So the chances of you getting judicial fiat to work in your favor might take 75 years or so. lol

Actually, it will happen 10 minutes after Scalia takes a dirt nap and Hillary appoints his replacement.

And Ginsberg is older than Scalia, while Breyer is only 2 years younger than Scalia. It is as likely that the SCOTUS will lose an anti-gun nut as to lose Scalia.

Yeah, but since you clowns are never electing a President ever again, it's a one-for-one exchange.

 

[JoeB131]

And Joey, you keep talking about "common sense gun laws".

But what you want is far from common sense.

You have ranted about wanting people shot for what they believe.

You have ranted about wanting people sent to prison or bankrupted defending themselves, when they have broken no law.

You have gone on and on about how dangerous privately owned guns are, when the facts show that more than 99% of the privately owned guns are never used to harm anyone (except perhaps criminals).

You have expressed a desire to make hunting so expensive that only the rich can do it, thereby virtually bankrupting state conservation efforts and deny food banks and soup kitchens more than 1.9 million servings of healthy protein.

Your ideas are so far from reality as to be nonsensical. Even the Brady Bunch of anti-gun folks haven't said they want what you are suggesting. You are on the lunatic fringe.

Are you done crying about what a big meany-head I am, because it comes off a bit whiney.

 

[WinterBorn]

And Joey, you keep talking about "common sense gun laws".

But what you want is far from common sense.

You have ranted about wanting people shot for what they believe.

You have ranted about wanting people sent to prison or bankrupted defending themselves, when they have broken no law.

You have gone on and on about how dangerous privately owned guns are, when the facts show that more than 99% of the privately owned guns are never used to harm anyone (except perhaps criminals).

You have expressed a desire to make hunting so expensive that only the rich can do it, thereby virtually bankrupting state conservation efforts and deny food banks and soup kitchens more than 1.9 million servings of healthy protein.

Your ideas are so far from reality as to be nonsensical. Even the Brady Bunch of anti-gun folks haven't said they want what you are suggesting. You are on the lunatic fringe.

Are you done crying about what a big meany-head I am, because it comes off a bit whiney.

Pointing out your hypocrisy is almost as much fun as pointing out your lies.

 

[WinterBorn]

If it were not an individual right, why didn't they SCOTUS rule that individuals couldn't buy machine guns back in the 1930s?

It has not been ruled on between the 1930s and 2008. So the chances of you getting judicial fiat to work in your favor might take 75 years or so. lol

Actually, it will happen 10 minutes after Scalia takes a dirt nap and Hillary appoints his replacement.

And Ginsberg is older than Scalia, while Breyer is only 2 years younger than Scalia. It is as likely that the SCOTUS will lose an anti-gun nut as to lose Scalia.

Yeah, but since you clowns are never electing a President ever again, it's a one-for-one exchange.

If I were a republican, you might have a basis for this comment. (even if it's wrong) But I am not, so keep trying.

 

[WinterBorn]

[

First you have got to get Hillary elected. She is carrying a lot of baggage.

Then you have to get a case to be heard by the SCOTUS. Something that, on this topic, is exceedingly rare.

Hillary will win by a landslide. Nobody who voted for Obama in 2012 is going to vote for one of your crazies next time, and a lot of White Suburban women who wouldn't vote for Obama just can't wait to vote for Hillary.

Why wouldn't all those white suburban women vote for Obama?

 

[hipeter924]

Freedom is relative to the individual. In my mind true freedom will only exist when people can choose the society they live under. We are not 'free' as we can't choose how we want to live, and a worldview and way of life is forced upon us at birth.

 

[JoeB131]

[]

If I were a republican, you might have a basis for this comment. (even if it's wrong) But I am not, so keep trying.

Only a Republican is going to find a right to own guns in the Militia Amendment.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Why wouldn't all those white suburban women vote for Obama?

racism. Come on, you aren't this dense, are you?

 

[WinterBorn]

[
Why wouldn't all those white suburban women vote for Obama?

racism. Come on, you aren't this dense, are you?

So you are betting on the racist vote to get Hillary elected? lmao

 

[WinterBorn]

[]

If I were a republican, you might have a basis for this comment. (even if it's wrong) But I am not, so keep trying.

Only a Republican is going to find a right to own guns in the Militia Amendment.

Only a socialist will claim an item in the Bill of Rights preserves a power for the gov't.

 

[JoeB131]

[
Why wouldn't all those white suburban women vote for Obama?

racism. Come on, you aren't this dense, are you?

So you are betting on the racist vote to get Hillary elected? lmao

No, i'm counting on the woman's vote.

You see, the problem you guys have got is that no one who voted for Obama in 2012 is going to vote for your guy this time. But a few people who voted for Romney will come over for Hillary.

 

[JoeB131]

[]

If I were a republican, you might have a basis for this comment. (even if it's wrong) But I am not, so keep trying.

Only a Republican is going to find a right to own guns in the Militia Amendment.

Only a socialist will claim an item in the Bill of Rights preserves a power for the gov't.

Or someone with a bit of common sense. "Well-Regulated Militia". That's pretty fucking clear.

 

[Synthaholic]

Florida Makes Off-Grid Living Illegal 8211 Mandates All Homes Must Be Connected To An Electricity Grid Collective-Evolution

"It’s no secret that an opposition to sustainable living exists. Earlier this year, Texas state brought several SWAT teams to a sustainable community and threatened to shut it down. Each one of the community members were initially handcuffed at gunpoint. It was called “The Garden of Eden Community,” and was totally self sustainable. You can read more about that here.

This time, it’s Robin Speronis that’s come under fire. She lives off the grid in Florida, completely independent of the city’s water and electric system. A few weeks ago, officials ruled her off-grid home illegal. Officials cited the International Property Maintenance Code, which mandates that homes be connected to an electricity grid and a running water source. That’s just like saying our dependency on corporations isn’t even a choice. The battle to live without most utilities has been ongoing for Robin, the self-sufficient woman has lived for more than a year and a half using solar energy, a propane camping stove and rain water.

In the end, she was found not guilty of not having a proper sewer or electrical system; but was guilty of not being hooked up to an approved water supply."

Florida is run by Republicans in the House, Senate, and Governorship. Has been for years.

This is what happens, people, when you let the corporatists run your state.

 

[WinterBorn]

[
Why wouldn't all those white suburban women vote for Obama?

racism. Come on, you aren't this dense, are you?

So you are betting on the racist vote to get Hillary elected? lmao

No, i'm counting on the woman's vote.

You see, the problem you guys have got is that no one who voted for Obama in 2012 is going to vote for your guy this time. But a few people who voted for Romney will come over for Hillary.

So you are counting on the racist suburban women who wouldn't vote for Obama to be liberal enough to vote for Hillary? lmao

 

[WinterBorn]

[]

If I were a republican, you might have a basis for this comment. (even if it's wrong) But I am not, so keep trying.

Only a Republican is going to find a right to own guns in the Militia Amendment.

Only a socialist will claim an item in the Bill of Rights preserves a power for the gov't.

Or someone with a bit of common sense. "Well-Regulated Militia". That's pretty fucking clear.

"...the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." seems pretty simple to me too. The right of the people.