Wrong.so far we dont know if it was a fair election,,
That it was a fair, honest, lawful, and Constitutional election was never in question.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Wrong.so far we dont know if it was a fair election,,
maybe in your mind,, but thankfully youre not the only mother fucker in the country,,Wrong.
That it was a fair, honest, lawful, and Constitutional election was never in question.
Never.At what point do we conclude the political and legal process has failed, and we take up arms?
The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.This is what Trumpism has brought us and it`s not good. They`re no longer just Deplorables, they have murder on their minds as we witnessed on Jan. 6th.
'When Do We Get to Use the Guns?': TP USA Audience Member Asks Charlie Kirk When Can 'We Kill' Democrats? (Video)
An audience member asked a disturbing and stunning question at a speech given by close Trump family ally and Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk in Idaho on Monday, but instead of denouncing and disavowing the question itself as being anti-democratic, morally repugnant, illegal, based on...www.thenewcivilrightsmovement.com
your premise is a lie,,Never.
There is nothing in the text, history, or caselaw of the Second Amendment that supports insurrectionist dogma.
There is nothing in the text, history, or caselaw of the Second Amendment that supports the wrongheaded notion that a lawfully elected government reflecting the will of people may be ‘overthrown’ through force of arms.
There is nothing in the text, history, or caselaw of the Constitution that establishes a criterion of tyranny or authorizes lawless armed insurrection.
The Second Amendment doesn’t ‘trump’ the First – it does not take from the people their right to petition the government for a redress of grievances through the political or judicial process.
That a minority of the people might subjectively and incorrectly perceived that either the political or judicial process has ‘failed’ is not ‘justification’ to destroy that government by an act of treasonous, violent rebellion.
The Framers did not amend the Constitution to authorize the destruction of the Republic they just created.
It is therefore an ignorant and idiotic question.
This is a lie.why are you leaving out people like Feinstein that has been trying to take guns for decades along with other dems??
does she know that??This is a lie.
No one advocates ‘taking away’ anyone’s guns – including Feinstein.
Feinstein advocates for a new AWB – and like the 1994 measure, those in possession of assault weapons would be allowed to keep such weapons; no guns ‘confiscated,’ not guns ‘taken away.’
NRA leader mangles Feinstein quote about taking guns
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has offered a bill to ban bump fire stocks after police found 12 rifles equipped with twww.politifact.com
Assume you are right (you're not).This is a lie.
No one advocates ‘taking away’ anyone’s guns – including Feinstein.
Feinstein advocates for a new AWB – and like the 1994 measure, those in possession of assault weapons would be allowed to keep such weapons; no guns ‘confiscated,’ not guns ‘taken away.’
NRA leader mangles Feinstein quote about taking guns
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has offered a bill to ban bump fire stocks after police found 12 rifles equipped with twww.politifact.com
Which of course will not happen.Let me know when a single gun is taken away from a law abiding citizen.
No, the ‘left’ is trying to combat rightwing violence.The left is hoping to provoke rightwing violence
Which is the purpose of the daily Black Lies Matter and ANTIFA riots in blue cities across America for the past 18 months
Which of course will not happen.
In order for guns to be ‘confiscated,’ a law would need to be enacted authorizing ‘confiscation.’
Needless to say, no such law would be enacted because it would not pass Constitutional muster on Second Amendment and Fifth Amendment grounds.
Gun ‘confiscation’ and ‘taking away’ guns are nothing more than rightwing lies and demagoguery.
The founding fathers disagree with you, having obviously found a point where the answer was "now"Never.
Says the known liar.This is a lie.
Anyone who supports red flag laws supports the confiscation of guns from the law abiding.Which of course will not happen.
In order for guns to be ‘confiscated,’ a law would need to be enacted authorizing ‘confiscation.’
This is a lie.It happens every time someone invokes a red flag law.
due process would be to dispute of them being taken not getting them back you nazi fuck,,,This is a lie.
Risk protection orders do not authorize the ‘confiscation’ of firearms – they are perfectly Constitutional and in no manner violate the Second, Fourth, or Fifth Amendments.
Only a judge can authorize an order and the gunowner is afforded comprehensive due process allowing for the return of his firearm.
This is a lie.
Risk protection orders do not authorize the ‘confiscation’ of firearms
No.Was the South justified in starting the Civil War?
NonsenseNo, the ‘left’ is trying to combat rightwing violence.
Correct.I'd caution Trump supporters that this street runs both ways.
There are lots of liberals (like me), who like and enjoy using their guns.