USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
What NEW law would have prevented this murder?
Bailey Holt. 15. Say her name NRA.
- Thread starter Bourbon
- Start date
What NEW law would have prevented this murder?
Let me ask you this;
If you buy a bushel of apples and find a few wormy ones, do you throw them out and keep the good ones?
Or do you throw the whole bushel out and start hating apples, like you do us responsible gun owners?
Why don’t you ask that idiot, Abatis? He’s the one making the claim, cretin.
Where is BLM? Oh that's right. They don't care about black on black.
DumberThanIQ76 strikes again!!!
You having trouble following this? He was wrong, idiot. He was commenting on something that never occurred.
RW Trumptards do that frequently. Just as you are totally confused on this thread.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
those babies were FAILED by their teachers and their parents. they DESERVED to be safe but weren't because their idiot parents and teachers believed the bullshit you liberal anti gunners spew about gun violence. their blood is on YOUR hands.
deflection because you were exposed for a fraud.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
maybe others will start answering questions when your dumbfuck idiot ass answers questions. until then, shut the fuck up, childish moron.
Then why did you ask me instead of him?
You resort to childish name calling simply
because you don't have the intelligence
to participate in an adult discussion.
Go play with your blow up doll, she'll listen...
USFREEDOM911
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN
What NEW law would have prevented this murder?
It's called a quote and citation; kinda hard to do legitimately without cutting and pasting.
You should try substantiating your arguments instead of just spouting groundless nonsense.
Since the right to privacy is only found in the "emanations" and "penumbras" of the first eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights, the right to privacy and thus the right to abortion totally depends upon the "rational continuum" remaining unbroken.
You can call it "hilarious" but what you can't do is compose a reasoned, supported legal argument why I'm wrong.
Sorry rube.
Still nothing to do with guns I see, moron. Penumbra or no penumbra.
Put down the bong, shithead.
You really are just stupid.
Try reading the quote of Planned Parenthood v Casey I posted.
Here, I'll "copy and paste" it again, you might get lost scrolling up. Hard to miss this time, see the red?
Again, Harlan's dissent in Poe is the foundational treatise for the legal invention (penumbral rights) that found the right to privacy.
"Neither the Bill of Rights nor the specific practices of States at the time of the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment marks the outer limits of the substantive sphere of liberty which the Fourteenth Amendment protects. See U. S. Const., Amend. 9. As the second Justice Harlan recognized:
"[T]he full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution. This `liberty' is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to keep and bear arms; the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on. It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints, . . . and which also recognizes, what a reasonable and sensitive judgment must, that certain interests require particularly careful scrutiny of the state needs asserted to justify their abridgment."
(ellipsis in original)
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)
"[T]he full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution. This `liberty' is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property; the freedom of speech, press, and religion; the right to keep and bear arms; the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on. It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints, . . . and which also recognizes, what a reasonable and sensitive judgment must, that certain interests require particularly careful scrutiny of the state needs asserted to justify their abridgment."
(ellipsis in original)
Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992)
This legal invention that found the right to abortion, just disappers into the mist if the "rational continuum" of rights can be broken . . .
One question that you just can't allow yourself to answer; can a right that is found to exist in the "emanations" and "penumbras" of the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights be more respected, more vital and more secure than a right that is specifically and expressly enumerated in the Bill of Rights?
A little intellectual integrity never hurt anyone, give it a try!
.
Show me where it states that abortion rights DEPEND on your right to carry your popgun. That was your statement.
BTW, textualists would eat you for lunch. "Rational continuum"? lol "Legal invention" is the appropriate term
Part of my Life is using my Liberty in my Pursuit Of Happiness by exercising my 2nd Amendment right.
It seems your consideration of this doesn't intellectually extend much further beyond 'gunz R dick substitutes'.
The term "rational continuum" isn't mine, it is the Supreme Court's description of the interlinked nature of our rights. In that chain is the right to arms and if a link in the chain can be cut out and discarded, the legal theory of 'penumbral rights" just can't be true . . .
I have zero problem saying the name of Bailey Holt.
I thank her for her sacrifice in paying for our right to have guns. A right that must be paid in blood.
It was her fate to die, and I find no sorrow in it, not when compared to the sorrow I would feel if we lost the right to be armed.
No regrets
not sorry
The 2nd amendment moves on.
I appreciate your understanding of civil rights and these postings have enlghtenened me a little maybe. most/ all of our rights are based upon our God given sovereignty and freewill to make the decisions which prove our predestination as free and living or not. PRIVACY is the rational and logical continuum in constitutional law which protects the God given sovereignty of individuals. we are all created in the image of God. God is sovereign.
Today is the funeral for the Bailey and Preston....Try not to politicize this evil and senseless tragedy for at least the remainder of today, out of respect for these two precious children and their grieving families...
If you must say their names, mention them, and the others still in the hospital recovering, in your prayers...
If you must say their names, mention them, and the others still in the hospital recovering, in your prayers...