The Left Seems Ready To Concede The War On Guns

[Rightguide]

Anyone not holding to communist ideology is by definition 'far right' to most of the posters here.

Isn't that the truth?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Abortion and the alleged "right" to abortion aren't in the Constitution either.

The alleged right to farm the land isn't in the Constitution either. The Constitution is terribly outdated and people only use it as a crutch when they don't have a solid argument. I've proven time and time again you give zero shits about the Constitution.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Isn't that the truth?

No, its a flat out lie.

 

[Chobham]

The alleged right to farm the land isn't in the Constitution either. The Constitution is terribly outdated and people only use it as a crutch when they don't have a solid argument. I've proven time and time again you give zero shits about the Constitution.

Really? The Constitution contains within it two methods to enact amendments. If it's so "outdated" surely, by now, there would be a movement to proceed on one of those two methods. There is a movement towards a convention of the states but the required number of states has not signed on yet. If you bother to do the research you may be surprised as to which states HAVE signed on and what they're proposing.

 

[Chobham]

Today the Nebraska legislature became the 27th state to pass 'Constitutional Carry." The vote was 33-14 and the governor has indicated that it will be signed into law.

I think it's time for you 'gun controller's' to re-evaluate how you want to deal with the 'crazies' among us.

 

[ll74]

Today the Nebraska legislature became the 27th state to pass 'Constitutional Carry." The vote was 33-14 and the governor has indicated that it will be signed into law.

I think it's time for you 'gun controller's' to re-evaluate how you want to deal with the 'crazies' among us.

For a bit, we'll deal with the crazies among you by being killed in large numbers.

And you'll blame everything but guns...still.

Constitutional carry just escalates everything....and it won't end well.

But be proud of the carnage,.dipshit. you'll get what you ordered.

Escalation never solves problems.

 

[Chobham]

For a bit, we'll deal with the crazies among you by being killed in large numbers.

And you'll blame everything but guns...still.

Constitutional carry just escalates everything....and it won't end well.

But be proud of the carnage,.dipshit. you'll get what you ordered.

Escalation never solves problems.

Hmmm, so guns are the solution, not the problem.

And if guns aren't the problem, what is?

 

[YDB95]

They are known to the educated as liberal sources. That of course excludes you.

They are known to the hard right as liberal sources. That of course explains your rather silly view.

Hmmm, so guns are the solution, not the problem.

What you bolded doesn't say that in any way.

And if guns aren't the problem, what is?

Well, exactly. The absolute lack of any meaningful regulations on who can get any kind of gun they want most certainly is the problem. Look no further than the rest of the developed world, where most countries have only one mass-shooting to point to. In Australia, people still talk about Port Arthur like it was just a few years ago. It was 27 years ago.

 

[ll74]

Hmmm, so guns are the solution, not the problem.

And if guns aren't the problem, what is?

That's what you read? Umm...no...they're the problem....clear as day.

 

[Rightguide]

The alleged right to farm the land isn't in the Constitution either. The Constitution is terribly outdated and people only use it as a crutch when they don't have a solid argument. I've proven time and time again you give zero shits about the Constitution.

Farming is controlled by the states. Read the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I have and that's stupid as all fuck. I've already stated the Constitution is a crutch for people with no solid cases. More than once gun control has been shown to be under the 9th and 10th it really depends on the whims of the SCOTUS at any given moment. We know about Brown vs Board and Plessy v Fergesson that the Constitution means absolutely nothing.

 

[Rightguide]

I have and that's stupid as all fuck. I've already stated the Constitution is a crutch for people with no solid cases. More than once gun control has been shown to be under the 9th and 10th it really depends on the whims of the SCOTUS at any given moment. We know about Brown vs Board and Plessy v Fergesson that the Constitution means absolutely nothing.

No it isn't. It's only stupid to dumb people like you. It is the law of the land.

Show me some examples of successful gun control cases supported by the 9th and 10th Amendments. We know from your inferences about
Brown vs Board and Plessy v Ferguson (you can't even spell it correctly) is that you must be in support of the kind of segregation and Jim Crow laws that Plessy v. Ferguson enabled and that Brown v Board of Education destroyed. either that or you don't understand what actually happened.

 

[Rightguide]

They are known to the hard right as liberal sources. That of course explains your rather silly view.

What you bolded doesn't say that in any way.

Stop with the BS, they have always been known as liberal sources.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Stop with the BS,

You first........!!

 

[YDB95]

Stop with the BS, they have always been known as liberal sources.

Known to people like you, for whom everyone to the left of Atilla the Hun looks liberal.

 

[Rightguide]

Back to the subject at hand. Any day now a federal court decision on California's gun control laws will rock the nation.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Back to the subject at hand. Any day now a federal court decision on California's gun control laws will rock the nation.

Can we set a date on this. Like say the end of the year?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Can we set a date on this. Like say the end of the year?

Careful. He's really really bad on setting concrete dates for his "wait and see" pronouncements, which is why they remain ephemeral.

 

[Rightguide]

Can we set a date on this. Like say the end of the year?

I'm thinking in terms of days or weeks. The Socialist Governor of Washington just signed their new assault weapon ban which was most likely Judge Roger Benitez was waiting for before posting his ruling on his consolidated cases which include California's assault weapon ban, magazine ban, and ammunition background check. Recall in the original hearings he declared all three unconstitutional. Now that the Bruen decision has been decided by the SCOTUS using his criteria for deciding 2A cases, text as informed by history, I expect him to do the same again any day now.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Gunny Shitpants can always be counted on to stand up tall for mass school shootings. Oooh-rah!

 

[HisArpy]

No it isn't. It's only stupid to dumb people like you. It is the law of the land.

Show me some examples of successful gun control cases supported by the 9th and 10th Amendments. We know from your inferences about
Brown vs Board and Plessy v Ferguson (you can't even spell it correctly) is that you must be in support of the kind of segregation and Jim Crow laws that Plessy v. Ferguson enabled and that Brown v Board of Education destroyed. either that or you don't understand what actually happened.

This part gets my vote.

 

[HisArpy]

I'm thinking in terms of days or weeks. The Socialist Governor of Washington just signed their new assault weapon ban which was most likely Judge Roger Benitez was waiting for before posting his ruling on his consolidated cases which include California's assault weapon ban, magazine ban, and ammunition background check. Recall in the original hearings he declared all three unconstitutional. Now that the Bruen decision has been decided by the SCOTUS using his criteria for deciding 2A cases, text as informed by history, I expect him to do the same again any day now.

I think he's waiting on the NJ assault weapons case decision before he publishes his 4. Either that or that 2nd circuit case out of NY that the SCOTUS is watching.

 

[Rightguide]

I think he's waiting on the NJ assault weapons case decision before he publishes his 4. Either that or that 2nd circuit case out of NY that the SCOTUS is watching.

Whenever it is it will most likely be another pro 2A bombshell.