Supreme Court says Illinois may ban sale of rapid-fire assault weapons for now

NiftyNiblick said:
Banning further sales of assault weapons is a very insufficient measure.
The existing ones should be confiscated with Draconian consequences imposed for failure to cooperate.

The tax payers would unfortunately have to bear the burden of funding at least some monetary compensation
but that's our own fault for allowing the distribution of those weapons in the first place.
Click to expand...

Why don't you move to canada?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
they didn't give one. they didn't need to. statists like guno think that if the law was unconstitutional, then the supreme court would have taken it up and ruled so. That's the way of ignorants who think they know better..........

the SCOTUS is letting the process play out. this case has to go through the lower courts first and allow the plaintiffs and state to build the arguments before it comes to them.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The idiot quano tells usnits because they think it's unconstitutional even though the court has consistently supported 2nd amendment cases
 
Jade Dragon said:
Look for more gun shops to pop up around the border in Indiana and Missouri especially. Most guns in places like Chicago come from out of state, to begin with. It only works if other states would need an in-state license to purchase.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you better brush up on the interstate sale of handguns.

 
archives said:
No rather, I understand the Constitution, and not the interpretation the NRA puts out in cherry-picked quotes from the Founders
Click to expand...

Poor anchovies, I love alt-lefties that rewrite history. Let's tear down another statue before you prattle on with your interpretation of the Constitution and its amendments.
 
archives said:
No rather, I understand the Constitution, and not the interpretation the NRA puts out in cherry-picked quotes from the Founders
Click to expand...

The NRA doesn't interpret the constitution. Would you say your understanding of the constitution aligns with the understanding of the constitution held by the people whose job it is to actually interpret the constitution?
 
archives said:
No rather, I understand the Constitution, and not the interpretation the NRA puts out in cherry-picked quotes from the Founders
Click to expand...

you do not understand it at all. you've been shown many times how wrong you are about it. all you've ever been able to put out there to 'bolster' your misinterpretation is a single long justice 200 years after the fact.
 
floridafan said:
I am sure your posters spend the day on this site, most every day on this site, all for the fun of it.
Click to expand...

I don’t believe it is posters, rather one or two individuals with multiple pseudonyms, one who even swings both ways, initiating threads from both perspectives. Is it the entity running the forum, not sure, and based on the quality of the posts, he certainly doesn’t, or at least shouldn’t, pay them
 
Lionfish said:
Poor anchovies, I love alt-lefties that rewrite history. Let's tear down another statue before you prattle on with your interpretation of the Constitution and its amendments.
Click to expand...

Don’t “rewrite,” just understand it, and certainly enough to label Thomas’s interpretation as ludicrous, has the logic of a high school term paper
 
archives said:
Don’t “rewrite,” just understand it, and certainly enough to label Thomas’s interpretation as ludicrous, has the logic of a high school term paper
Click to expand...

What law school did you graduate from? I hope you graduated higher in your class than Brandon did.
 
Yakuda said:
The NRA doesn't interpret the constitution. Would you say your understanding of the constitution aligns with the understanding of the constitution held by the people whose job it is to actually interpret the constitution?
Click to expand...

Sure they do, just look at their websites, and those “people you think actually interpret the constitution” do anything but, rather, they reframe the Constitution to justify their political agenda, did you really think corporations were real people
 
archives said:
Sure they do, just look at their websites, and those “people you think actually interpret the constitution” do anything but, rather, they reframe the Constitution to justify their political agenda, did you really think corporations were real people
Click to expand...

I will ask you AGAIN do you think your understanding of the constitution comports with the understanding of those who are actually charged with interpreting the constitution?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
you do not understand it at all. you've been shown many times how wrong you are about it. all you've ever been able to put out there to 'bolster' your misinterpretation is a single long justice 200 years after the fact.
Click to expand...

That’s not true, even the opposite weighs more, I’ve even given you actual quotes from the Founders that contradict the ones you copied off of the NRA sources, as I’ve said, they were prolific writers, and it is easy to find a line or two they authored to support nearly anything you want

And the second half of your post regarding I supposedly what I “put out there” doesn’t make sense
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top