Infringement

[EvMetro]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

Shall not be infringed is pretty specific.

This says it all.

Banning concealed carry is not infringement.

And neither is restricting what constitutes arms.

Case law heavily support that reasonable restrictions as not "infringement".

Just like it is against the law to libel and slander (though the bar is, rightfully high, in order to protect free speech).

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

in·fringe·ment
/inˈfrinjmənt/

1. The action of limiting or undermining something.

 

[EvMetro]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

Which is why there is no right to use firearms but for a few very specific instances



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

"Limiting" the right to use of firearms as you say, is infringement in its purest form. Limiting the right to keep and bear arms in ANY way is the very definition of infringement.

 

[Coyote]

Shall not be infringed is pretty specific.

This says it all.

Banning concealed carry is not infringement.

And neither is restricting what constitutes arms.

Case law heavily support that reasonable restrictions as not "infringement".

Just like it is against the law to libel and slander (though the bar is, rightfully high, in order to protect free speech).

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

in·fringe·ment
/inˈfrinjmənt/

1. The action of limiting or undermining something.

hmmm. How does banning concealed carry limit your ability to carry arms?

It doesn't.

 

[Coyote]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

Which is why there is no right to use firearms but for a few very specific instances



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

"Limiting" the right to use of firearms as you say, is infringement in its purest form. Limiting the right to keep and bear arms in ANY way is the very definition of infringement.

I demand my nuke.

 

[Coyote]

Shall not be infringed is pretty specific.

This says it all.

Banning concealed carry is not infringement.

And neither is restricting what constitutes arms.

Case law heavily support that reasonable restrictions as not "infringement".

Just like it is against the law to libel and slander (though the bar is, rightfully high, in order to protect free speech).

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

 

[Blues Man]

No right is unlimited or unrestricted.

Which is why there is no right to use firearms but for a few very specific instances



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

"Limiting" the right to use of firearms as you say, is infringement in its purest form. Limiting the right to keep and bear arms in ANY way is the very definition of infringement.

The second only protects the right to keep and bear arms not to use those arms.

There are only several very well defined instances where a person has the right to use a firearm

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[Blues Man]

This says it all.

Banning concealed carry is not infringement.

And neither is restricting what constitutes arms.

Case law heavily support that reasonable restrictions as not "infringement".

Just like it is against the law to libel and slander (though the bar is, rightfully high, in order to protect free speech).

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

in·fringe·ment
/inˈfrinjmənt/

1. The action of limiting or undermining something.

hmmm. How does banning concealed carry limit your ability to carry arms?

It doesn't.

If open carry is allowed it does not but open carry is not allowed in many places

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

This says it all.

Banning concealed carry is not infringement.

And neither is restricting what constitutes arms.

Case law heavily support that reasonable restrictions as not "infringement".

Just like it is against the law to libel and slander (though the bar is, rightfully high, in order to protect free speech).

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

 

[Coyote]

Banning concealed carry is not infringement.

And neither is restricting what constitutes arms.

Case law heavily support that reasonable restrictions as not "infringement".

Just like it is against the law to libel and slander (though the bar is, rightfully high, in order to protect free speech).

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

It's a right like any other under the constitution. That means it isn't unlimited.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

It's a right like any other under the constitution. That means it isn't unlimited.

"Shall not be infringed " for fuck sake some of you people got jipped by the public school system.

 

[Coyote]

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

It's a right like any other under the constitution. That means it isn't unlimited.

"Shall not be infringed " for fuck sake some of you people got jipped by the public school system.

We understand law a bit better than you lot I suspect.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

It's a right like any other under the constitution. That means it isn't unlimited.

"Shall not be infringed " for fuck sake some of you people got jipped by the public school system.

At least they got an education.

The ‘literalist’ crowd clearly have no education at all.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Banning concealed carry is not infringement.

And neither is restricting what constitutes arms.

Case law heavily support that reasonable restrictions as not "infringement".

Just like it is against the law to libel and slander (though the bar is, rightfully high, in order to protect free speech).

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

The stupidity and ignorance exist solely with those who reject the authority of the courts to determine the meaning of the Constitution – including the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any gun whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

It’s as simple as that.

 

[Gdjjr]

It is not a right to keep and carry any gun whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

Can you point out the caveat limiting or restricting in the 2nd amendment?
What does shall not be infringed mean? Is it just a suggestion?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

It's a right like any other under the constitution. That means it isn't unlimited.

"Shall not be infringed " for fuck sake some of you people got jipped by the public school system.

At least they got an education.

The ‘literalist’ crowd clearly have no education at all.

.
I couldn't think as slow as you people if I tried. For shits and giggle why don't one of you genius tell me the part of the 2nd Amendment that mentions restrictions ?

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

It's a right like any other under the constitution. That means it isn't unlimited.

"Shall not be infringed " for fuck sake some of you people got jipped by the public school system.

We understand law a bit better than you lot I suspect.

Ok what part of the 2nd amendment mentions restriction .........

 

[Blues Man]

You just used the words "banning" and "restricting". Both of those words are infringement.

Explain exactly how banning concealed carry infringes on the right. I will wait.

"Shall not be infringed". Its that simple.

Courts don't seem to agree with your whacko interpretations.

Pardon me while I go look for virgins to sacrifice under my right to religious freedom. Assuming I can find any.

Another stupid argument my owning firearms does not in any way impact any ones rights. I'm a law abiding citizen that's not hurting or killing anyone with my firearms unless I'm protecting me and mine. The 2nd Amendment is clear I don't give a fuck what you or the courts say "Shall not be infringed" that's the end of the argument.
What the hell do you ignorant bastards think is going to happen when you come for our firearms, oh right it won't be people like yourself.

It's a right like any other under the constitution. That means it isn't unlimited.

The mere ownership of guns is not the problem

It doesn't matter what firearms a person owns

We already have laws that clearly define the legal uses of firearms



Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

[pismoe]

boy oh boy , what is it , its about 80 or MORE Years that gun owners ,NRA and other guns groups have been playing word games with their anti gun enemies . The talk and BS shoulda been nipped in the bud many many years ago but gun owner people were too bus watching tv Sports and drinking beer I Guess .

 

[danielpalos]

Which gun control laws do not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

Our Second Amendment is clear. Don't grab guns, grab gun lovers and regulate them well!

 

[pismoe]

boy oh boy , what is it , its about 80 or MORE Years that gun owners ,NRA and other guns groups have been playing word games with their anti gun enemies . The talk and BS shoulda been nipped in the bud many many years ago but gun owner people were too bus watching tv Sports and drinking beer I Guess .

----------------------------------- i mean , when was the first infringement . Quick guess would be that it was sometime in the late 20s 0r early thirties with Machine gun rules and regulation' . Yet certain government employees and their gov taxpayer paid employer bosses run around with some pretty nice full auto stuff on USA city streets every day .