What restrictions infringe on the right to keep and bear arms?

[Failzero]

I did…embarrass yourself and explain it to me.

The way some here want Posters to explain what Marxism is or what Socialism is ?

 

[MagicMike]

Like leaving knives just lying around in a drawer?
View attachment 948541
This is an old, worn out argument.

Knives only kill at close range and seldom kill and maim an entire crowd at once.
Much like broken beer bottles.
Not the same thing at all.

ITake the 14th for example and birthright citizenship…there’s no way in hell our framers would allow a pathway for trespassers to fuck over core Americans and steal U.S. citizenships for their children.

Agreed.
Again, they had no way of anticipating what America in the 21st century was going to look like.
In reality they probably weren't these "wise sages" after all. Just ordinary men....usually with whiskey buzzes clouding their thinking.
Most of our founding document could certainly use some tweaking and adjusting to bring it into the complex realities of our modern era. The Second Amendment is no exception.

Like the Heller and Roe cases the court will eventually get the 14th right with a retroactive clause.

Maybe, but your perception about "eventually getting it right" is short-sighted and blatantly partisan. The legal fashion pendulum is always in motion. At present the pendulum has swung to the conservative side....which just happens to align with your own values and political leanings so (naturally you perceive the trend as "right."
In another generation of the SCOTUS the pendulum may swing to the other side and reverse the current laws on these things....and of course then you (or future people "like" you) will be bitching about how WRONG these decisions are again.
Take Roe v. Wade for instance. That law or "norm" was on the books for nearly 50 years.
Heller only 16 years.
Relatively speaking your right to own firearms for (this myth of) "personal protection" is a real newbie compared to the right women used to have to manage their own reproductive decisions.
So honestly which "right" carries the most credence in terms of established constitutional law?
Again, it's all just current trend and fashion. Very little to do with the founding "intent" of the COTUS.

You obviously have no idea of the original intent of the 2nd.

Neither do you. Unless you have a time machine.

Our great founders were referring to We The Armed People as that well regulated militia, they wanted you to be armed to prevent a government from turning tyrannical.

But they were ignorant of what the future had in store, because they didn't have time machines either.
If they had they would have known that individual firearms would someday be useless against the full might of The U.S. Government....if it ever comes down to that.
Imagine an anthill taking on a flame thrower.
Kinda like that.

A "militia" is comprised of civilians whom are NOT under the command of government. We all learned that by third grade...you didn't?

You didn't either.
Try not to lie to me. I spot it too easily and it diminishes your argument.

The founders intent is made crystal clear by the third and fourth phrase.
“the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Nothing crystal clear about any of it in 2024.

Let me know what else you’d like me to teach you?

Is this a joke?

hahaha…poor lib.
The U.S. Constitution is the absolute blueprint and operators manual for all that we are.
Look, there’s no doubt the framers fucked up in several ways

They did the best they could.

…If they could do it all over again they would have made sure this nation stayed all white and likeminded. They would have made sure leftism could never take root in America…they would know now that our diversity is our demise.

You just blew your whole argument with ignorant racism.
Also your ignorance in thinking that the founders of our country were "right-wingers" is laughable.
They were COMPLETE leftist rebels!
Nice try though.
You ALMOST sounded intelligent and informed for a little while.

 

[BrokeLoser]

You just blew your whole argument with ignorant racism.

You think we have a gun user problem…Showing you who the primary abusers are is not racist at all. Facts can’t be racist. Your problem isn’t guns, it’s dark Democrats.

 

[Failzero]

B

You think we have a gun user problem…Showing you who the primary abusers are is not racist at all. Facts can’t be racist. Your problem isn’t guns, it’s dark Democrats.
View attachment 948646

But but the Mass Shooters are Charlottesville / 1/6 er Militia / NRA / III%er Oathkeeper Types Narrative hate you

 

[MagicMike]

You think we have a gun user problem…Showing you who the primary abusers are is not racist at all. Facts can’t be racist. Your problem isn’t guns, it’s dark Democrats.
View attachment 948646

Doubling down on ignorance is not a winning strategy.

 

[BrokeLoser]

B

But but the Mass Shooters are Charlottesville / 1/6 er Militia / NRA / III%er Oathkeeper Types Narrative hate you

Filthy Leftist: “We have a gun user problem, let’s import more dark people. We have a homeless problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We need more free shit for bottom feeders, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have a pollution problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have a wage problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have an education problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have a healthcare problem, let’s import more thirdworlders.”
This is the left, create problems, bitch about the problem and then make problems worse.
The filthy fucks can’t get out of their own way.

MagicMike

 

[BrokeLoser]

Doubling down on ignorance is not a winning strategy.

I doubled down on facts…facts that make you piss yourself apparently.

 

[MagicMike]

Filthy Leftist: “We have a gun user problem, let’s import more dark people. We have a homeless problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We need more free shit for bottom feeders, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have a pollution problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have a wage problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have an education problem, let’s import more thirdworlders. We have a healthcare problem, let’s import more thirdworlders.”
This is the left, create problems, bitch about the problem and then make problems worse.
The filthy fucks can’t get out of their own way.

MagicMike

Not all of us "leftists" consider these things as go to solutions.
For example I am a left-of-the-Kennedy's, die-hard Socialist and my first option to solve all these problems is to systematically round up all the MAGAts and self-identified political conservatives across the country and send then to re-education camps.
If after 90 days or so they don't seem to be responding to the de-programming we line them up beside earthen pits, machine gun them into them, burn the corpses, and then bury the garbage forever with bulldozers.
Problems solved.

 

[otto105]

I did…embarrass yourself and explain it to me.

Well regulated…still in the language.

 

[KissMy]

Good morning, Chicago.

A federal judge in Rockford ruled it unconstitutional for Illinoisans with concealed carry permits to be prohibited from carrying guns on public transportation, a decision with uncertain implications for a decade-old state law.

The decision was a result of a 2022 lawsuit filed by four people who alleged the section of Illinois’ concealed carry law that bars holders of concealed carry licenses, or CCLs, from carrying the guns on public buses or trains violated their Second Amendment right to self-defense under the U.S. Constitution.

At issue in U.S. District Judge Iain Johnston’s ruling was a constitutional test requiring gun laws to be “historically” consistent with laws on the books in the 18th century, when the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms was written, or before that.

This arose from the landmark 2022 case of New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, in which the U.S. Supreme Court’s conservative 6-3 majority established the new constitutional standard, which will also take center stage later this month when a federal judge representing southern Illinois hears arguments over the constitutionality of the state’s ban on so-called assault weapons.