Leftists Now Clamoring To Get Guns And Finding Out It's Not That Easy

[Mac-7]

I am guessing the NRA is using the coronavirus ans a marketing opportunity. There is no problems that guns cannot solve.

Since the NRA doesn't market guns, you dope.......how do you actually come up with your B.S......

The left is actually anti American gun owner but does not want to confront gun owners directly

so they pretend that the NRA is to blame for all their troubles

Rave on lunatic.

Knowing how easily gun grabbers change colors in order to blend with their surrounding I bet your gonna tell me you are a lifelong NRA member

I used to be a member until they let stupid people like you in.

How did I know that was coming?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

you do realize due process deals with the judicial system it has nothing to do with the creation of laws.
the 14th amendment was created to protect blacks from laws created by democrats that deprive them of rights other citizens have that are protected by the federal government.

And it's since been accepted for much more. So what if it was originally written to protect the Blacks. It has since been found for other uses. The wording doesn't say "Nigras" (as was the common name of the time), it says,

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Many of the Jim Crow Laws were done without due process and over time, were all found to be unconstitutional. You honestly believe that it only applied to persecuted Blacks? I am part Irish and it had a profound affect on the Irish Communities as well. They finally had to take down the "No Irish" signs in America.

And there are a ton of things that has nothing to do with race, religion or color that it applies to as well. Simple things that you take for granted like Driving a Car, how you keep your yard, and more. Communities (States, Counties and Cities) can create these laws as long as they are done within due process for public safety. This is why the Gun Regs have been upheld in all level of courts. They are presented as Public Safety and that falls well within the Due Process. Due Process is much more than protecting a Criminals rights.

You don't get it, states cannot create laws that restrict the Federally protected rights of its citizens that other U.S. Citizens enjoy, whether or not a leftist court rules for an unconstitutional law does not make it Constitutional
I have a feeling the courts will not be so left-leaning after the president leaves the white house.

One huge problem. Every new Justice goes through a mini bootcamp before they make their first ruling. They become Constitutionalists pretty fast. You want party rulings. Well, you aren't going to get it. The only time that may happen is when it's iffy at best on which way it can go and the Legislation hasn't done it's job. You are still waiting for the Supreme Court to rerule on Roe V Wade. Newsflash, cupcake: even the most right wingers on the supreme court have already stated that it's the law and they aren't go to overrule the previous ruling.

As for 2nd Amendment, the ONLY time the modern Supreme Court has touched the 2nd Amendment was Heller V D.C. only because there is no state Federal court to rule on it. And even then, they didn't give you what you keep crying about. Heller V is the gold standard now for Gun Regulations and it's the basis for the other rulings by the courts that allows the States, Counties and Cities to create various gun regulations. The reason for that is, the Supreme Court can only rule on Federal Matters when the lower courts are ruling on State Matters. The 2nd Amendment applies to the Feds except for the ruling that came out of Heller V. Don't look for the Supreme Court to overturn the State or District Federal Courts because that's state not federal.

I'll say it again, if you don't like the state you are living in and it's laws, move to one that you do like.

the only problem is making your interpretation constitutionally valid. And that's not my problem.

The courts have decided what is and what isn't constitutional, not me nor I. It's up to them to interpret it and they have. And the power to regulate firearms is clearly put into the States, Counties and Cities hands. Not in your hands nor mine. And that is constitutional.

Because a court leftists may say something is Constitutional doesn't make it Constitutional
The Constitution is black and white it speaks for itself

 

[bigrebnc1775]

and gun laws that deprive the rights of citizens from the same rights other U.S. Citizens have would also be unconstitutional

When it's done by a State, County or City, and it meets the due process requirement then it's not the U.S. Citizen, it's the State Citizen. Every Citizen in that State has the same rights and privileges. Now you want to take away the States Rights. What's next, you going to ban Rocky Road Ice Cream and only allow Pumpernickle?

Due process you dumb fuck is a judicial process not a legislative process

Every law must meet the Due Process yardstick. If it doesn't, the courts should rule that it doesn't and overturn it. When a law is being passed, the question of Due Process is very high on the list before it's considered. Well, at least it should be. For instance; trying to pass a law limiting the number of held rounds in a handgun to 10. Due to Heller V, that does not meet the due process requirement. And has been ruled as such by even the 9th Circuit Court. But 15 rounds does meet the "Reasonable" requirement. How does that affect due process? Simple. If you have a 10 round or less mag, no problem. But if you have a Mag with less 20, the Manufacturer must offer it as a 15 shot mag. They do this by either inserting plugs or rivets in the 20 round. Much like the old 7 shot shotguns had to have at least 2 dummy rounds in it to drop the tube capacity to 5. The AR-15 is different where they have to manufacture a new 15 round mag from scratch.

I think another word for "Due Process" is "Reasonable". And ALL Citizens shall be treated with the same reasonable process. Your ideas of "Reasonable" is outside the normal citizens idea of "Normal" or "Reasonable". When you finally realize that you will be much, much happier.

due process is a judicial process and no dumbass there is no other word for due process
you are writing shit as if you get paid by the word

Your tag is interesting. Once again, you just took part of it and left out the rest of it.

Text. In Luke chapter 11, the parable is as follows: When the strong man, fully armed, guards his own dwelling, his goods are safe. But when someone stronger attacks him and overcomes him, he takes from him his whole armour in which he trusted, and divides his spoils.

It's a Parable. It means that the Devil is the strong man. And God is the Stronger one. It has nothing to do with weapons of any kind. It means, put your faith in God and the Devil will be overcome. Once again, you took something out of context and in this case, it is the Bible, Heathen.

The Strong Man Armed, Luke ch.11 vv.21-22 « Sermons « Bible Sermons Online - Bible-Sermons.org.uk

dodge and dive duck and roll
pay attention
due process is a judicial process and no dumbass there is no other word for due process
you are writing shit as if you get paid by the word

 

[bigrebnc1775]

you really suck at reading comprehension what in the hell do you think inalienable rights are? self-defense is an inalienable right which means the right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable right.

According to Heller V D.C, you have the right to have a reasonable handgun in your home. The State, County or City has the right to require reasonable licensing and documentation for you to possess that reasonable handgun in your home. Anything else can be regulated by the State, County or City to include a total ban on a specific gun as long as it's done for public safety meeting the Due process requirement.

For instance, Mag Capacities. 10 round capacity limits do not meet the Due Process. But 15 does. It was first upheld in 2013 for Colorado in a Federal Court. Colorado went into the procedings with a 10 round capacity but during the deliberation, they lawyers picked up pretty quick that that wouldn't fly. The Colorado Congress modified the law that very day to read 15 and it sailed right on through. The cited Heller V D.C. as reasonable. It met the Due Process requirements.

The State determines the Mag Limits. Some have 15, some have 20 while others don't have any limits. As Judge Young of Boston said, "If you don't like the laws where you are, MOVE".

you have a right to self defense regradless where you are at

True, within reason. As per the Heller V ruling. And the State, County and City has the right to place requirements on when, where and how you can defend yourself outside the home.

right to self defense has no limitations it doesn't stop outside you home

The State, County and Cities have the right to require you to have permits, licensing, etc. if they deem it's necessary. You want to go armed in NYC, it's your right but you have to have the proper permits and registrations to do it. The last thing cities the size of NYC needs is for every block corner to be another OK Corral. But requiring armed people on the street to receive the training and licensing seems to work out well.

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
To infringe would mean premits

 

[Uncensored2008]

When I stopped at the outdoor sports and supply store this weekend, ammo was being cleared out and a huge line to buy guns. All I could do was laugh.

Why? Are they going to shoot the virus? Or was everyone rushing to make their planned purchases before the store got closed by state order?

You need to put a sign on your door that reads "NO GUNS HERE, COMPLETELY UNARMED, CASH AND VALUABLES KEPT ON PREMISE"

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Wrong.

See the Slaughter-House Cases (1873) with regard to the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In essence, the 14th Amendment codifies the doctrine of inalienable rights, where the protected liberties of citizens who reside in the states cannot be violated by state government – even if a law enacted by the state reflects the will of the majority of the people.

The courts decide when a state has acted contrary to the 14th Amendment and violated the rights of citizens residing in that state.

And the courts have determined that states which have enacted UBCs have governed in accordance with the 14th Amendment.

you really suck at reading comprehension what in the hell do you think inalienable rights are? self-defense is an inalienable right which means the right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable right.

According to Heller V D.C, you have the right to have a reasonable handgun in your home. The State, County or City has the right to require reasonable licensing and documentation for you to possess that reasonable handgun in your home. Anything else can be regulated by the State, County or City to include a total ban on a specific gun as long as it's done for public safety meeting the Due process requirement.

For instance, Mag Capacities. 10 round capacity limits do not meet the Due Process. But 15 does. It was first upheld in 2013 for Colorado in a Federal Court. Colorado went into the procedings with a 10 round capacity but during the deliberation, they lawyers picked up pretty quick that that wouldn't fly. The Colorado Congress modified the law that very day to read 15 and it sailed right on through. The cited Heller V D.C. as reasonable. It met the Due Process requirements.

The State determines the Mag Limits. Some have 15, some have 20 while others don't have any limits. As Judge Young of Boston said, "If you don't like the laws where you are, MOVE".

you have a right to self defense regradless where you are at

True, within reason. As per the Heller V ruling. And the State, County and City has the right to place requirements on when, where and how you can defend yourself outside the home.

right to self defense has no limitations it doesn't stop outside you home

As with the right to possess a firearm, the right to self-defense is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any gun whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

Government has the authority under the Second Amendment to enact measures imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of guns, including licensing requirements with regard to the carrying of concealed firearms.

Indeed, your own state has a pistol permit requirement – a racist remnant from the days of Jim Crow intended to prevent African-Americans from obtaining firearms.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Since the NRA doesn't market guns, you dope.......how do you actually come up with your B.S......

The left is actually anti American gun owner but does not want to confront gun owners directly

so they pretend that the NRA is to blame for all their troubles

Rave on lunatic.

Knowing how easily gun grabbers change colors in order to blend with their surrounding I bet your gonna tell me you are a lifelong NRA member

I used to be a member until they let stupid people like you in.

How did I know that was coming?

There were a lot of us that were members before the NRA go involved in Politics. It used to be a fantastic public support organization that really did push hard for gun safety and education. Not so much today.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

And it's since been accepted for much more. So what if it was originally written to protect the Blacks. It has since been found for other uses. The wording doesn't say "Nigras" (as was the common name of the time), it says,

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Many of the Jim Crow Laws were done without due process and over time, were all found to be unconstitutional. You honestly believe that it only applied to persecuted Blacks? I am part Irish and it had a profound affect on the Irish Communities as well. They finally had to take down the "No Irish" signs in America.

And there are a ton of things that has nothing to do with race, religion or color that it applies to as well. Simple things that you take for granted like Driving a Car, how you keep your yard, and more. Communities (States, Counties and Cities) can create these laws as long as they are done within due process for public safety. This is why the Gun Regs have been upheld in all level of courts. They are presented as Public Safety and that falls well within the Due Process. Due Process is much more than protecting a Criminals rights.

You don't get it, states cannot create laws that restrict the Federally protected rights of its citizens that other U.S. Citizens enjoy, whether or not a leftist court rules for an unconstitutional law does not make it Constitutional
I have a feeling the courts will not be so left-leaning after the president leaves the white house.

One huge problem. Every new Justice goes through a mini bootcamp before they make their first ruling. They become Constitutionalists pretty fast. You want party rulings. Well, you aren't going to get it. The only time that may happen is when it's iffy at best on which way it can go and the Legislation hasn't done it's job. You are still waiting for the Supreme Court to rerule on Roe V Wade. Newsflash, cupcake: even the most right wingers on the supreme court have already stated that it's the law and they aren't go to overrule the previous ruling.

As for 2nd Amendment, the ONLY time the modern Supreme Court has touched the 2nd Amendment was Heller V D.C. only because there is no state Federal court to rule on it. And even then, they didn't give you what you keep crying about. Heller V is the gold standard now for Gun Regulations and it's the basis for the other rulings by the courts that allows the States, Counties and Cities to create various gun regulations. The reason for that is, the Supreme Court can only rule on Federal Matters when the lower courts are ruling on State Matters. The 2nd Amendment applies to the Feds except for the ruling that came out of Heller V. Don't look for the Supreme Court to overturn the State or District Federal Courts because that's state not federal.

I'll say it again, if you don't like the state you are living in and it's laws, move to one that you do like.

the only problem is making your interpretation constitutionally valid. And that's not my problem.

The courts have decided what is and what isn't constitutional, not me nor I. It's up to them to interpret it and they have. And the power to regulate firearms is clearly put into the States, Counties and Cities hands. Not in your hands nor mine. And that is constitutional.

Because a court leftists may say something is Constitutional doesn't make it Constitutional
The Constitution is black and white it speaks for itself

You have a tendency do what others do with scripture. You take only part of the scripture and leave out the rest which changes it whole meaning. You need to use the WHOLE Constitution. And that is what I do. And that is the job of a Judge.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

When it's done by a State, County or City, and it meets the due process requirement then it's not the U.S. Citizen, it's the State Citizen. Every Citizen in that State has the same rights and privileges. Now you want to take away the States Rights. What's next, you going to ban Rocky Road Ice Cream and only allow Pumpernickle?

Due process you dumb fuck is a judicial process not a legislative process

Every law must meet the Due Process yardstick. If it doesn't, the courts should rule that it doesn't and overturn it. When a law is being passed, the question of Due Process is very high on the list before it's considered. Well, at least it should be. For instance; trying to pass a law limiting the number of held rounds in a handgun to 10. Due to Heller V, that does not meet the due process requirement. And has been ruled as such by even the 9th Circuit Court. But 15 rounds does meet the "Reasonable" requirement. How does that affect due process? Simple. If you have a 10 round or less mag, no problem. But if you have a Mag with less 20, the Manufacturer must offer it as a 15 shot mag. They do this by either inserting plugs or rivets in the 20 round. Much like the old 7 shot shotguns had to have at least 2 dummy rounds in it to drop the tube capacity to 5. The AR-15 is different where they have to manufacture a new 15 round mag from scratch.

I think another word for "Due Process" is "Reasonable". And ALL Citizens shall be treated with the same reasonable process. Your ideas of "Reasonable" is outside the normal citizens idea of "Normal" or "Reasonable". When you finally realize that you will be much, much happier.

due process is a judicial process and no dumbass there is no other word for due process
you are writing shit as if you get paid by the word

Your tag is interesting. Once again, you just took part of it and left out the rest of it.

Text. In Luke chapter 11, the parable is as follows: When the strong man, fully armed, guards his own dwelling, his goods are safe. But when someone stronger attacks him and overcomes him, he takes from him his whole armour in which he trusted, and divides his spoils.

It's a Parable. It means that the Devil is the strong man. And God is the Stronger one. It has nothing to do with weapons of any kind. It means, put your faith in God and the Devil will be overcome. Once again, you took something out of context and in this case, it is the Bible, Heathen.

The Strong Man Armed, Luke ch.11 vv.21-22 « Sermons « Bible Sermons Online - Bible-Sermons.org.uk

dodge and dive duck and roll
pay attention
due process is a judicial process and no dumbass there is no other word for due process
you are writing shit as if you get paid by the word

You just won an award.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

According to Heller V D.C, you have the right to have a reasonable handgun in your home. The State, County or City has the right to require reasonable licensing and documentation for you to possess that reasonable handgun in your home. Anything else can be regulated by the State, County or City to include a total ban on a specific gun as long as it's done for public safety meeting the Due process requirement.

For instance, Mag Capacities. 10 round capacity limits do not meet the Due Process. But 15 does. It was first upheld in 2013 for Colorado in a Federal Court. Colorado went into the procedings with a 10 round capacity but during the deliberation, they lawyers picked up pretty quick that that wouldn't fly. The Colorado Congress modified the law that very day to read 15 and it sailed right on through. The cited Heller V D.C. as reasonable. It met the Due Process requirements.

The State determines the Mag Limits. Some have 15, some have 20 while others don't have any limits. As Judge Young of Boston said, "If you don't like the laws where you are, MOVE".

you have a right to self defense regradless where you are at

True, within reason. As per the Heller V ruling. And the State, County and City has the right to place requirements on when, where and how you can defend yourself outside the home.

right to self defense has no limitations it doesn't stop outside you home

The State, County and Cities have the right to require you to have permits, licensing, etc. if they deem it's necessary. You want to go armed in NYC, it's your right but you have to have the proper permits and registrations to do it. The last thing cities the size of NYC needs is for every block corner to be another OK Corral. But requiring armed people on the street to receive the training and licensing seems to work out well.

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
To infringe would mean premits

Wrong. It would be an infringement if it was not allowed at all. Case in point, Heller V D.C..

 

[Mac-7]

The left is actually anti American gun owner but does not want to confront gun owners directly

so they pretend that the NRA is to blame for all their troubles

Rave on lunatic.

Knowing how easily gun grabbers change colors in order to blend with their surrounding I bet your gonna tell me you are a lifelong NRA member

I used to be a member until they let stupid people like you in.

How did I know that was coming?

There were a lot of us that were members before the NRA go involved in Politics. It used to be a fantastic public support organization that really did push hard for gun safety and education. Not so much today.

Who needs gun safety is no one owns a gun?

The NRA was forced to respond to liberal insanity toward the 2nd Amendment

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

How effective are my guns against COVID-19? Having been in biomedical research for over a quarter of a century, including a stint in an infectious diseases division of a top tier US pharma company I musty admit, I had not considered that.

I am guessing the NRA is using the coronavirus ans a marketing opportunity. There is no problems that guns cannot solve.

Since the NRA doesn't market guns, you dope.......how do you actually come up with your B.S......

The left is actually anti American gun owner but does not want to confront gun owners directly

so they pretend that the NRA is to blame for all their troubles

Rave on lunatic.

Knowing how easily gun grabbers change colors in order to blend with their surrounding I bet your gonna tell me you are a lifelong NRA member

There are no ‘gun grabbers’ – that’s a rightwing lie.

Advocating for necessary, proper, and Constitutional firearm regulatory measures is not to advocate for the ‘confiscation’ of firearms.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

you really suck at reading comprehension what in the hell do you think inalienable rights are? self-defense is an inalienable right which means the right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable right.

According to Heller V D.C, you have the right to have a reasonable handgun in your home. The State, County or City has the right to require reasonable licensing and documentation for you to possess that reasonable handgun in your home. Anything else can be regulated by the State, County or City to include a total ban on a specific gun as long as it's done for public safety meeting the Due process requirement.

For instance, Mag Capacities. 10 round capacity limits do not meet the Due Process. But 15 does. It was first upheld in 2013 for Colorado in a Federal Court. Colorado went into the procedings with a 10 round capacity but during the deliberation, they lawyers picked up pretty quick that that wouldn't fly. The Colorado Congress modified the law that very day to read 15 and it sailed right on through. The cited Heller V D.C. as reasonable. It met the Due Process requirements.

The State determines the Mag Limits. Some have 15, some have 20 while others don't have any limits. As Judge Young of Boston said, "If you don't like the laws where you are, MOVE".

you have a right to self defense regradless where you are at

True, within reason. As per the Heller V ruling. And the State, County and City has the right to place requirements on when, where and how you can defend yourself outside the home.

right to self defense has no limitations it doesn't stop outside you home

As with the right to possess a firearm, the right to self-defense is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any gun whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

Government has the authority under the Second Amendment to enact measures imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of guns, including licensing requirements with regard to the carrying of concealed firearms.

Indeed, your own state has a pistol permit requirement – a racist remnant from the days of Jim Crow intended to prevent African-Americans from obtaining firearms.

Yes I keep reminding you democrat leftist about your racist history and gun control
the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The left is actually anti American gun owner but does not want to confront gun owners directly

so they pretend that the NRA is to blame for all their troubles

Rave on lunatic.

Knowing how easily gun grabbers change colors in order to blend with their surrounding I bet your gonna tell me you are a lifelong NRA member

I used to be a member until they let stupid people like you in.

How did I know that was coming?

There were a lot of us that were members before the NRA go involved in Politics. It used to be a fantastic public support organization that really did push hard for gun safety and education. Not so much today.

Not at all today.

I left when the NRA became a partisan mouthpiece for the GOP and rightwing extremists.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I am guessing the NRA is using the coronavirus ans a marketing opportunity. There is no problems that guns cannot solve.

Since the NRA doesn't market guns, you dope.......how do you actually come up with your B.S......

The left is actually anti American gun owner but does not want to confront gun owners directly

so they pretend that the NRA is to blame for all their troubles

Rave on lunatic.

Knowing how easily gun grabbers change colors in order to blend with their surrounding I bet your gonna tell me you are a lifelong NRA member

There are no ‘gun grabbers’ – that’s a rightwing lie.

Advocating for necessary, proper, and Constitutional firearm regulatory measures is not to advocate for the ‘confiscation’ of firearms.

This is just an absurd lie

 

[bigrebnc1775]

you have a right to self defense regradless where you are at

True, within reason. As per the Heller V ruling. And the State, County and City has the right to place requirements on when, where and how you can defend yourself outside the home.

right to self defense has no limitations it doesn't stop outside you home

The State, County and Cities have the right to require you to have permits, licensing, etc. if they deem it's necessary. You want to go armed in NYC, it's your right but you have to have the proper permits and registrations to do it. The last thing cities the size of NYC needs is for every block corner to be another OK Corral. But requiring armed people on the street to receive the training and licensing seems to work out well.

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
To infringe would mean premits

Wrong. It would be an infringement if it was not allowed at all. Case in point, Heller V D.C..

wrong case in point shall not be infringed

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Due process you dumb fuck is a judicial process not a legislative process

Every law must meet the Due Process yardstick. If it doesn't, the courts should rule that it doesn't and overturn it. When a law is being passed, the question of Due Process is very high on the list before it's considered. Well, at least it should be. For instance; trying to pass a law limiting the number of held rounds in a handgun to 10. Due to Heller V, that does not meet the due process requirement. And has been ruled as such by even the 9th Circuit Court. But 15 rounds does meet the "Reasonable" requirement. How does that affect due process? Simple. If you have a 10 round or less mag, no problem. But if you have a Mag with less 20, the Manufacturer must offer it as a 15 shot mag. They do this by either inserting plugs or rivets in the 20 round. Much like the old 7 shot shotguns had to have at least 2 dummy rounds in it to drop the tube capacity to 5. The AR-15 is different where they have to manufacture a new 15 round mag from scratch.

I think another word for "Due Process" is "Reasonable". And ALL Citizens shall be treated with the same reasonable process. Your ideas of "Reasonable" is outside the normal citizens idea of "Normal" or "Reasonable". When you finally realize that you will be much, much happier.

due process is a judicial process and no dumbass there is no other word for due process
you are writing shit as if you get paid by the word

Your tag is interesting. Once again, you just took part of it and left out the rest of it.

Text. In Luke chapter 11, the parable is as follows: When the strong man, fully armed, guards his own dwelling, his goods are safe. But when someone stronger attacks him and overcomes him, he takes from him his whole armour in which he trusted, and divides his spoils.

It's a Parable. It means that the Devil is the strong man. And God is the Stronger one. It has nothing to do with weapons of any kind. It means, put your faith in God and the Devil will be overcome. Once again, you took something out of context and in this case, it is the Bible, Heathen.

The Strong Man Armed, Luke ch.11 vv.21-22 « Sermons « Bible Sermons Online - Bible-Sermons.org.uk

dodge and dive duck and roll
pay attention
due process is a judicial process and no dumbass there is no other word for due process
you are writing shit as if you get paid by the word

You just won an award.

View attachment 314071

troll you didn't address
due process is a judicial process and no dumbass there is no other word for due process
and you're still dodging it
you are writing shit as if you get paid by the word

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You don't get it, states cannot create laws that restrict the Federally protected rights of its citizens that other U.S. Citizens enjoy, whether or not a leftist court rules for an unconstitutional law does not make it Constitutional
I have a feeling the courts will not be so left-leaning after the president leaves the white house.

One huge problem. Every new Justice goes through a mini bootcamp before they make their first ruling. They become Constitutionalists pretty fast. You want party rulings. Well, you aren't going to get it. The only time that may happen is when it's iffy at best on which way it can go and the Legislation hasn't done it's job. You are still waiting for the Supreme Court to rerule on Roe V Wade. Newsflash, cupcake: even the most right wingers on the supreme court have already stated that it's the law and they aren't go to overrule the previous ruling.

As for 2nd Amendment, the ONLY time the modern Supreme Court has touched the 2nd Amendment was Heller V D.C. only because there is no state Federal court to rule on it. And even then, they didn't give you what you keep crying about. Heller V is the gold standard now for Gun Regulations and it's the basis for the other rulings by the courts that allows the States, Counties and Cities to create various gun regulations. The reason for that is, the Supreme Court can only rule on Federal Matters when the lower courts are ruling on State Matters. The 2nd Amendment applies to the Feds except for the ruling that came out of Heller V. Don't look for the Supreme Court to overturn the State or District Federal Courts because that's state not federal.

I'll say it again, if you don't like the state you are living in and it's laws, move to one that you do like.

the only problem is making your interpretation constitutionally valid. And that's not my problem.

The courts have decided what is and what isn't constitutional, not me nor I. It's up to them to interpret it and they have. And the power to regulate firearms is clearly put into the States, Counties and Cities hands. Not in your hands nor mine. And that is constitutional.

Because a court leftists may say something is Constitutional doesn't make it Constitutional
The Constitution is black and white it speaks for itself

You have a tendency do what others do with scripture. You take only part of the scripture and leave out the rest which changes it whole meaning. You need to use the WHOLE Constitution. And that is what I do. And that is the job of a Judge.

dodge boy, you think this is how you win a debate? lol

 

[ElmerMudd]

According to Heller V D.C, you have the right to have a reasonable handgun in your home. The State, County or City has the right to require reasonable licensing and documentation for you to possess that reasonable handgun in your home. Anything else can be regulated by the State, County or City to include a total ban on a specific gun as long as it's done for public safety meeting the Due process requirement.

For instance, Mag Capacities. 10 round capacity limits do not meet the Due Process. But 15 does. It was first upheld in 2013 for Colorado in a Federal Court. Colorado went into the procedings with a 10 round capacity but during the deliberation, they lawyers picked up pretty quick that that wouldn't fly. The Colorado Congress modified the law that very day to read 15 and it sailed right on through. The cited Heller V D.C. as reasonable. It met the Due Process requirements.

The State determines the Mag Limits. Some have 15, some have 20 while others don't have any limits. As Judge Young of Boston said, "If you don't like the laws where you are, MOVE".

you have a right to self defense regradless where you are at

True, within reason. As per the Heller V ruling. And the State, County and City has the right to place requirements on when, where and how you can defend yourself outside the home.

right to self defense has no limitations it doesn't stop outside you home

As with the right to possess a firearm, the right to self-defense is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any gun whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.

Government has the authority under the Second Amendment to enact measures imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of guns, including licensing requirements with regard to the carrying of concealed firearms.

Indeed, your own state has a pistol permit requirement – a racist remnant from the days of Jim Crow intended to prevent African-Americans from obtaining firearms.

Yes I keep reminding you democrat leftist about your racist history and gun control
the right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED

It already has been infringed, you idiot. Try to buy a machine gun, Try to buy a tank. Try to buy a grenade. I could go on and on about the arms you cannot buy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

According to Heller V D.C, you have the right to have a reasonable handgun in your home. The State, County or City has the right to require reasonable licensing and documentation for you to possess that reasonable handgun in your home. Anything else can be regulated by the State, County or City to include a total ban on a specific gun as long as it's done for public safety meeting the Due process requirement.

For instance, Mag Capacities. 10 round capacity limits do not meet the Due Process. But 15 does. It was first upheld in 2013 for Colorado in a Federal Court. Colorado went into the procedings with a 10 round capacity but during the deliberation, they lawyers picked up pretty quick that that wouldn't fly. The Colorado Congress modified the law that very day to read 15 and it sailed right on through. The cited Heller V D.C. as reasonable. It met the Due Process requirements.

The State determines the Mag Limits. Some have 15, some have 20 while others don't have any limits. As Judge Young of Boston said, "If you don't like the laws where you are, MOVE".

you have a right to self defense regradless where you are at

True, within reason. As per the Heller V ruling. And the State, County and City has the right to place requirements on when, where and how you can defend yourself outside the home.

right to self defense has no limitations it doesn't stop outside you home

The State, County and Cities have the right to require you to have permits, licensing, etc. if they deem it's necessary. You want to go armed in NYC, it's your right but you have to have the proper permits and registrations to do it. The last thing cities the size of NYC needs is for every block corner to be another OK Corral. But requiring armed people on the street to receive the training and licensing seems to work out well.

the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed
To infringe would mean premits

lol

So your state’s pistol permits are ‘un-Constitutional.’

Too funny.

But at least you’re consistent at being wrong.

To ‘infringe’ means to violate – to enact a measure repugnant to the Constitution and its case law.

To enact a measure banning handguns is an example of an infringement on the Second Amendment right, as the Heller Court held that such prohibitions are un-Constitutional.

The courts determine what the Constitution means, ultimately the Supreme Court – including what laws and measures violate the Constitution.

And until such time as the courts rule on the constitutionality of a given law or measure, that law or measure is presumed to be Constitutional, and not an infringement upon the rights and protected liberties of the people.