“Law fare” of the anti-gun extremists…

[Bob Blaylock]

Infringing the people's rights to keep and bear arms is also specifically prohibited in the Constitution.

Well, no, the Constitution clearly talks about WELL REGULATED MILITIAS.

It speaks of a right belonging to the people, and forbids infringement of that right.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It speaks of a right belonging to the people, and forbids infringement of that right.

And now you understand why the board has an ignore function.

 

[Bell Huey]

The Constitution isn't an issue. The Second Amendment is about Militias.

And again, the Fed Gov took 140 or so years before they put any restrictions on firearms.

 

[JoeB131]

I gave you a substantive argument

Not once, not even by accident.

I wasn’t lying.

Yeah, you kind of are. Chicago's gun laws (which were never really all that tough and barely enforced) were all struck down by the McDonald Decision, and immediately afterwards, gun stores popped up on every corner. Chicago went from 400 homicides a year in 2014 to 800 homicides a year in 2020.

 

[Hollie]

Not once, not even by accident.

Come now, dear. Your feelings were hurt because I scolded you for your nonsense “militia” claim regarding the Constitution and the right to bear arms being an individual right as determined by the S.C.

Don’t go away mad. Just don’t be so gawd awful ignorant.

 

[JoeB131]

It speaks of a right belonging to the people, and forbids infringement of that right.

But only in the context of a well-regulated militia. The original draft of the Second also included a passage allowing for religious exemption from militia service. It's immediately followed by the third amendment, which limits the quartering of troops.

You see, here's the ugly little secret. Guns were RARE in colonial times. They were expensive (often costing a month's salary for a skilled craftsman) and difficult to maintain. They were slow to reload and only really accurate in volleys.

And now you understand why the board has an ignore function.

Oh, Bob is never going to put me on ignore. He's obsessed.
But I can see why you need one... reality is too much for you.

And again, the Fed Gov took 140 or so years before they put any restrictions on firearms.

Because for 140 years, most people didn't own guns and didn't need them. In fact, the reason why the NRA was originally formed after the Civil War was that a Union general was horrified by how ignorant of guns Americans were. It was only after criminals started using military-grade weapons to settle gang disputes that the government felt the need to start getting some control of it.

Now, here's the gag. Before the 1970's, everyone, including the NRA, was fine with it. When the Black Panthers started brandishing weapons, the NRA worked with Republican governors to ban open carry.

What changed was that the gun industry got greedy. When hunting started falling out of favor as a sport, they needed new markets. Scaring the hell out of average people by arming the criminals created that market. So suddenly, gun ownership became a "right".

Former Chief Justice Warren Burger (A Republican) said, "The gun lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies – the militia – would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires."

 

[JoeB131]

Come now, dear. Your feelings

Have nothign to do with this... repeating what you hear on Hate Radio like you had an original idea won't fly.

 

[Bell Huey]

But only in the context of a well-regulated militia. The original draft of the Second also included a passage allowing for religious exemption from militia service. It's immediately followed by the third amendment, which limits the quartering of troops.

You see, here's the ugly little secret. Guns were RARE in colonial times. They were expensive (often costing a month's salary for a skilled craftsman) and difficult to maintain. They were slow to reload and only really accurate in volleys.


Oh, Bob is never going to put me on ignore. He's obsessed.
But I can see why you need one... reality is too much for you.




Because for 140 years, most people didn't own guns and didn't need them. In fact, the reason why the NRA was originally formed after the Civil War was that a Union general was horrified by how ignorant of guns Americans were. It was only after criminals started using military-grade weapons to settle gang disputes that the government felt the need to start getting some control of it.

Now, here's the gag. Before the 1970's, everyone, including the NRA, was fine with it. When the Black Panthers started brandishing weapons, the NRA worked with Republican governors to ban open carry.

What changed was that the gun industry got greedy. When hunting started falling out of favor as a sport, they needed new markets. Scaring the hell out of average people by arming the criminals created that market. So suddenly, gun ownership became a "right".

Former Chief Justice Warren Burger (A Republican) said, "The gun lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime. The real purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that state armies – the militia – would be maintained for the defense of the state. The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires."

I am quite aware of the history of the NRA.

 

[Hollie]

Have nothign to do with this... repeating what you hear on Hate Radio like you had an

Oh, dear. How do we help you resolve your hurt feelings and get you on board with the law?

How about…. Gun Rights are Trans Rights™

Feel better?

 

[2aguy]

Let me know when you have a substantive argument.


Fetuses still aren't people.
Check out the 2020 Census. They didn't count ONE Fetus.


Well, no, the Constitution clearly talks about WELL REGULATED MILITIAS.


Stop lying about Chicago. All of Chicago's Sensible gun laws were overturned with the McDonald Decision. After that, our murder rate doubled. (It was a bit more complicated than that). Gun stores popped up on very corner after McDonald.

Liar.

They still dont have ranges or gun stores and it takes 16 hours and hundreds of dollars to get a carry permit....while the democrats are releasing violent gun offenders without cash bail...

 

[2aguy]

Not once, not even by accident.



Yeah, you kind of are. Chicago's gun laws (which were never really all that tough and barely enforced) were all struck down by the McDonald Decision, and immediately afterwards, gun stores popped up on every corner. Chicago went from 400 homicides a year in 2014 to 800 homicides a year in 2020.

There are no gun atores in chicago

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It speaks of a right belonging to the people, and forbids infringement of that right.

But only in the context of a well-regulated militia.

It does not say that.

 

[JoeB131]

I am quite aware of the history of the NRA.

Then you realize how actually crazy their current positions are, then?

It does not say that.

It pretty clearly says that.

 

[Bell Huey]

Then you realize how actually crazy their current positions are, then?



It pretty clearly says that.

I am not a member and I really don't pay much attention to their lobbyist issues. I separate the NRA's Safety Arm from the Lobbying arm.

 

[bugs]

The movie “The Devil’s Advocate,” explained this…….the law gets these evil people into everything……..the anti-gun extremists are using the legal system to attack our Right to own and carry guns. The suing of innocent people who obeyed the law is simply evil…but then, when have leftists been anything other than evil totalitarians………


The Biden administration has already put nearly 2,000 gun sellers out of business in just two years. Just a few years ago, a lawsuit helped drive the 200-year-old Remington Arms into bankruptcy. But activists won’t stop suing gun shops and anyone else that comes close to the industry.
———-
Everytown for Gun Safety, filed a lawsuit against a shop that sold the gun used in the fatal shooting of 10 people at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York
——-
Psychiatrists had previously evaluated the shooter without finding him to be a danger to himself or others — which is nothing unusual. Half of the mass public shooters since 1998 had seen mental health professionals. But if trained mental health professionals couldn’t realize this man was so dangerous, it’s hard to blame the parents. It certainly doesn’t make sense to sue them.

Unfortunately, lawsuits, such as this one by interest groups like Everytown, are more interested in punishing people they oppose or causing others to change their behavior in desired ways than seeking the truth. With billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s deep pockets, Everytown does not worry about funding its lawsuits. The same can’t be said for their targets, such as a small gun store. Social media companies aren’t going to be bankrupted by the lawsuits, but they may be even more likely to censor material that gun-control groups such as Everytown dislike.

No, Gun-Control Groups Don't Care What Causes Mass Shootings

The lessons from the Buffalo shooting are right in the killer’s manifesto, but gun-control groups like Everytown don't care.

thefederalist.com

it's the Reason I am a Dues paying Member of GOA

 

[Hollie]

Then you realize how actually crazy their current positions are, then?



It pretty clearly says that.

You’re desperately trying to convince yourself that you’re not completely befuddled by the facts.

The SC has already ruled that the right to bear arms is an individual tight based upon the text, traditions and history.

As you are a renowned internet legal scholar, why don’t you impress us all with your analysis to include, “ I dun’ seen… you know… the thing”

 

[JoeB131]

You’re desperately

Ignoring you due to your lack of content, yes.

he SC has already ruled that the right to bear arms is an individual tight based upon the text, traditions and history.

And when we get one not dominated by religious fanatics and crazies, they'll rule the way it was interpreted for 200 years before that. You guys have already said that precedents can be thrown out. A few deaths or retirements and sanity will prevail again.

 

[Hollie]

Ignoring you due to your lack of content, yes.

And when we get one not dominated by religious fanatics and crazies, they'll rule the way it was interpreted for 200 years before that. You guys have already said that precedents can be thrown out. A few deaths or retirements and sanity will prevail again.

Among your usual, desperate tactics. You're kinda' going off the deep end claiming SC justices are religious fanatics.

I'm sure you would prefer more DEI hires to the SC as they tend to be unqualified and appeal to the Dem / Socialist ideology.

 

[JoeB131]

You're kinda' going off the deep end claiming SC justices are religious fanatics.

Have you met Thomas and Barrett? These are people who think they are talking to God. They have medication for that now.

I'm sure you would prefer more DEI hires to the SC as they tend to be unqualified and appeal to the Dem / Socialist ideology.

Thomas is only on there because he's black and Barrett is only on there because she has a vagina.

 

[Hollie]

Have you met Thomas and Barrett? These are people who think they are talking to God. They have medication for that now.

I'm sure you would prefer more DEI hires to the SC as they tend to be unqualified and appeal to the Dem / Socialist ideology.

Thomas is only on there because he's black and Barrett is only on there because she has a vagina.

As expected, you just parott what you hear on the Joy Reid show.

What are the meds for Dem / Socialist disease?