9th Circuit Court has ruled that there is no right to carry, openly or concealed

reagansghost said:
why is it all these gun nuts demand to open carry?

are they so afraid they feel threatened every time they leave house? they think there's always a big black dude at the 711 or church about to mug them?

either they're pussies or that shit hanging from their waist is a penis substitute
Click to expand...

there are 10 dead people in colorado that probably wished they had a gun the last 30 seconds of their lives.............but maybe they also thought that only people who carried were too scared..........
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the 2nd Amendment does not confer a right. the right is inherent. the 2nd Amendment says it shall not be infringed. government is to have no authority over the people and their arms OR HOW THEY CARRY THEM
Click to expand...

Wrong again, stupid fuck.

“In District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice Scalia rightly recognized that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not absolute. It has never been unlimited, not at the time of the Framing and thus not today. The Second Amendment, Justice Scalia explained, enshrined a pre-existing right that was subject to "important limitation"; it plainly was not a right to have and carry any weapon in any manner for any purpose.That is, in colonial times, one had a right to keep and bear only certain weapons in certain manners for certain purposes. And Justice Scalia emphasized that the same weapon- manner-and-purpose limitations that applied in the Framing era still apply today.”

https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1230&context=uclr
 
If any of those 10 had a gun on them, at least they might have had a chance to defend themselves.
Or people around them.
 
domer76 said:
Wrong again, stupid fuck.

“In District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice Scalia rightly recognized that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is not absolute. It has never been unlimited, not at the time of the Framing and thus not today. The Second Amendment, Justice Scalia explained, enshrined a pre-existing right that was subject to "important limitation"; it plainly was not a right to have and carry any weapon in any manner for any purpose.That is, in colonial times, one had a right to keep and bear only certain weapons in certain manners for certain purposes. And Justice Scalia emphasized that the same weapon- manner-and-purpose limitations that applied in the Framing era still apply today.”

https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1230&context=uclr
Click to expand...


shut up, moron. you have no fucking clue

Opponents of the Amendments always try to diminish the right enumerated in the Amendments by asserting rights are not absolute. This is just another straw man argument because the Amendment is about imposing a restraint of the powers of the government concerning a right: not granting a right or defining the extent of a right. In addition, a review of the Second Amendment shows the restraint imposed by the Amendment does not contain any exceptions.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
shut up, moron. you have no fucking clue

Opponents of the Amendments always try to diminish the right enumerated in the Amendments by asserting rights are not absolute. This is just another straw man argument because the Amendment is about imposing a restraint of the powers of the government concerning a right: not granting a right or defining the extent of a right. In addition, a review of the Second Amendment shows the restraint imposed by the Amendment does not contain any exceptions.
Click to expand...

The law, stupid fuck. Read it and weep, loser. :rofl2:
 
domer76 said:
Coming from the idiot that thinks he wrote the Constitution. Priceless!
Click to expand...

i understand that you are not one of we the people because you hate america, the constitution that you don't understand, and freedom.

it's funny how you decline to accept concepts, until you tried to use one...........

go sit down, child. the adults are talking here
 
9th Circuit Court has ruled that there is no right to carry, openly or concealed

And they were wrong. There's nothing in the Constitution that gives government the authority to regulate this.
 
Guille said:
9th Circuit Court has ruled that there is no right to carry, openly or concealed

And they were wrong. There's nothing in the Constitution that gives government the authority to regulate this.
Click to expand...

Maybe the 9th. Circuit Court should read each individual state's constitutions...
 
SmarterthanYou said:
i understand that you are not one of we the people because you hate america, the constitution that you don't understand, and freedom.

it's funny how you decline to accept concepts, until you tried to use one...........

go sit down, child. the adults are talking here
Click to expand...

To think you were one of the “people” who wrote the Constitution is just fucking hilarious. One of the five stupidest posts on this forum. Ever. And you own the other four, as well. :lolup:
 
domer76 said:
To think you were one of the “people” who wrote the Constitution is just fucking hilarious. One of the five stupidest posts on this forum. Ever. And you own the other four, as well. :lolup:
Click to expand...

you're the brainless bitch who selectively believes in stupid shit. not me. that you can't understand concepts is your moronic issue.

you really are the stupidest fuck on the forum and, with evince out here, that's saying something
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you're the brainless bitch who selectively believes in stupid shit. not me. that you can't understand concepts is your moronic issue.

you really are the stupidest fuck on the forum and, with evince out here, that's saying something
Click to expand...

Five stupidest posts ever made on this forum. You’re #1-5, stupid fuck. :lolup:

There is no gun problem.

Vehicles cannot be necessary in a modern society.

Smarterthanyou wrote the Constitution.

Gun regulations are not in the interest of public safety.

Smarterthanyou knows the Constitution better than SCOTUS
 
domer76 said:
Five stupidest posts ever made on this forum. You’re #1-5, stupid fuck. :lolup:

There is no gun problem.

Vehicles cannot be necessary in a modern society.

Smarterthanyou wrote the Constitution.

Gun regulations are not in the interest of public safety.

Smarterthanyou knows the Constitution better than SCOTUS
Click to expand...

all of them as true as it is that you're the dumbest fuckhead on the forum.

you lose, bitch
 
SmarterthanYou said:
no founder ever said the courts ruled over the constitution, dumbfuck. only failed americans need to be told what the constitution means by the government
Click to expand...

But that applies to you as well. Prior to the search and seizure cases that began to appear before the USSC in the early 20th century the police were able to search and seize evidence at will.

You are always bleating about police abuses and necessary warrants, yet all that you hold dear in this area was brought about by judicial review, and might I add, judicial activism.
 
Taft2016 said:
But that applies to you as well. Prior to the search and seizure cases that began to appear before the USSC in the early 20th century the police were able to search and seize evidence at will.

You are always bleating about police abuses and necessary warrants, yet all that you hold dear in this area was brought about by judicial review, and might I add, judicial activism.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking you have that very confused. It took the courts to tell the enforcement branch of governments what the constitution means.........

judicial review can be a useful tool of the courts, until they use the constitution to restrict the people instead of restricting the government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top