Marine vet prosecutor refuses to cross constitutional line on Spanberger ‘assault weapon' ban

[markef]

Yes, of course

Do you not find your reply kinda stoopid? Lightening strike is more common than being shot, so in order to draw your pistol, you had to ignore the greater chance of being struck by lightening and arm up for a lesser risk in order to draw a pistol.

It's already been covered that self defence by gun is a fallacy -

Thread 'The fallacy of self defence by gun'

May 19, 2022

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.

• Captain Caveman
• Replies: 542
• Forum: 2nd Amendment

• 
• 
• 

Your posts are hilarious and the gun nut argument is laughable. You like many others prove it.

Americans have been enjoying gun rights for hundreds of years and yet self-defense has only recently become a more prominent reason to value those rights given the increasing violence by lawless thugs who don't obey gun laws.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Americans have been enjoying gun rights for hundreds of years and yet self-defense has only recently become a more prominent reason to value those rights given the increasing violence by lawless thugs who don't obey gun laws.

Yes, you gun nuts just keep repeating the same ole same and cannot debate. Only 32% of yanks decide to have a gun. So how can 68% survive and you can't?

Why can't gun nuts just answer simple questions? Is it an IQ problem?

 

[Gary Seven]

Are you claiming that leftist democrats should strip guns from law-abiding citizens because their chance of needing to defend themselves may be as low as their chances of being struck by lightning?

He's not even close. Just flapping his mouth.

 

[Hollie]

Yes, of course

Do you not find your reply kinda stoopid? Lightening strike is more common than being shot, so in order to draw your pistol, you had to ignore the greater chance of being struck by lightening and arm up for a lesser risk in order to draw a pistol.

It's already been covered that self defence by gun is a fallacy -

Thread 'The fallacy of self defence by gun'

May 19, 2022

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.

• Captain Caveman
• Replies: 542
• Forum: 2nd Amendment

• 
• 
• 

Your posts are hilarious and the gun nut argument is laughable. You like many others prove it.

Actually, it’s been determined that firearm use for self defense is a viable option.

You gun fetishists are on the losing end of your gun grabbing argument.

https://www.heritage.org/gun-rights/commentary/these-11-examples-defensive-gun-use-undermine-push-more-gun-control

 

[Hollie]

I asked, "What's your protection from being struck by lightening?"

You arm up to protect yourself from a threat that has a lower chance than you being struck by lightening. So how have you prepared against a greater threat, lightening?

You failed to answer a simple question.

That is such a ridiculous attempt at comparison that it’s laughably inept.

 

[Hollie]

Yes, you gun nuts just keep repeating the same ole same and cannot debate. Only 32% of yanks decide to have a gun. So how can 68% survive and you can't?

Why can't gun nuts just answer simple questions? Is it an IQ problem?

It seems you limeys are in need of an “ assault knife” ban. Maybe you need to be stripped of your butter knives and other kitchen utensils because you people just can’t control yourselves.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/sn04304/

 

[toobfreak]

Hapless Spanberger is discovering that gun bans just ain’t fair as a Virginia prosecutor will not enforce the leftist “assault rifle” ban.​

Poor democrat gun grabbers. It’s always somethin’.​

Surely the Governor of VA has a legal team to advise her on the legality of actions?

IMO, Spamburger should be arrested for trying to usurp and exceed the very Constitution she is sworn to uphold.

When you let people like this get away with attempts at sedition and undermining our rule of law, we might as well just invite the Chinese to invade us.

I mean seriously--- just ignoring this crap, does anyone expect this stuff to just go away when there are absolutely no consequences for trying?

This is NOT a 1st A right issue. This is courting sedition, and someone in government needs to step up and begin squashing this crap for the sedition it is.

I mean, when our own government is under attack by members of the government themselves, do we really need enemies like Iran and China, when we are doing it to ourselves?

Perhaps with their help.

Funny how the same democrats trying to undermine our way of life also just happen to all be pro-China, pro-Iran, pro-Hamas, and pro-EU. Anything but pro-America. But then, the democrat party DID signal during the SOTU that they did NOT put America nor Americans first.

 

[Muhammed]

Hapless Spanberger is discovering that gun bans just ain’t fair as a Virginia prosecutor will not enforce the leftist “assault rifle” ban.​

Poor democrat gun grabbers. It’s always somethin’.​

​

EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Marine vet prosecutor refuses to cross constitutional line on Spanberger ‘assault weapon' ban

Virginia prosecutor Ryan Mehaffey refuses to enforce Gov. Spanberger's new assault weapons ban, arguing it violates Second Amendment protections.

www.foxnews.com

EXCLUSIVE: Ryan Mehaffey, a Marine veteran and Virginia prosecutor, is taking a hard-line stance against what he believes is an "unconstitutional" new gun ban signed by Democratic Gov. Abigail Spanberger.

DOJ should send a SWAT team to her home at 4AM and make a felony arrest under 18 U.S.C. § 241 for violating everybody's 2nd amendment civil rights.

8.9 million counts. One for every single person in the state.

Everybody who voted for the bill is a criminal who needs to go to prison for civil rights violations. It is highly illegal to conspire to take away civil rights. Everyone of them should have their doors bashed in and be dragged right out of their beds and taken to jail at 4AM.

These egregious civil rights violations can be tolerated no longer. The Democratic party of slavery is constantly chipping away at our civil rights. They should be treated like criminals and traitors.

 

[markef]

Yes, you gun nuts just keep repeating the same ole same and cannot debate. Only 32% of yanks decide to have a gun. So how can 68% survive and you can't?

Why can't gun nuts just answer simple questions? Is it an IQ problem?

Heartless insensitive leftists do not want anyone enjoying 2nd amendment gun rights because they themselves don't care to own guns.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Actually, it’s been determined that firearm use for self defense is a viable option.

You gun fetishists are on the losing end of your gun grabbing argument.

https://www.heritage.org/gun-rights/commentary/these-11-examples-defensive-gun-use-undermine-push-more-gun-control

Read the link on the Harvard findings.

 

[EdwinAMartin]

I’m sure leftists are clueless when it comes to the absurdity of them lecturing others about “ following the law”.

It’s actually comical because there is no specific definition of an “assault rifle”.

They aren't the least interested in such details, they simply want to disarm white gun owners, period. They know where the real gun crime problems are, and could care less about those, it's all those law abiding uppity white proles they need to intimidate and disarm. they know criminals don't obey laws and aren't in the least affected by their silly sniveling.