Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
Yes, there are. You're just as ignorant as the people you insult.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The 2nd Amendment Protects the Others
- Thread starter tsuke
- Start date
Yes, there are. You're just as ignorant as the people you insult.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I recommend you saw off your shotgun barrel to 12" and walk into the local courthouse or police station and tell them how your precious 2nd is unrestricted.
Fucking moron.
and again, you fucking statist twat, the government can get away with violating the constitutional rights of the people because of pussy cowards like YOU who let them........
I posit a question to you.........what would you say if someone actually did carry a sawed off shotgun in to the local courthouse, but then was acquitted at trial by a jury of his peers???????
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Yes, there are. You're just as ignorant as the people you insult.
and you have zero understanding of the framers nor of the constitution.
there are none, by the 2nd Amendments plain and clear text.....SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED
When is Orangetweet going to nominate you for the SCOTUS, bitch?
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
and you have zero understanding of the framers nor of the constitution.
Why is a sawed off shotgun not Constitutionally protected?
and again, you fucking statist twat, the government can get away with violating the constitutional rights of the people because of pussy cowards like YOU who let them........
I posit a question to you.........what would you say if someone actually did carry a sawed off shotgun in to the local courthouse, but then was acquitted at trial by a jury of his peers???????
Don't give me your hypothetical "if/would" bullshit, loser.
Why don't you try this, pusswipe? YOU be the test case. See how that works. That is, unless you're just all talk.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
When is Orangetweet going to nominate you for the SCOTUS, bitch?
well THAT will never happen because it would inevitably eliminate the federal power, something that Orangetweet and the rest of the establishment oppressors do NOT want
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Why is a sawed off shotgun not Constitutionally protected?
read US v. Miller, if you have the intelligence to read.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Don't give me your hypothetical "if/would" bullshit, loser.
Why don't you try this, pusswipe? YOU be the test case. See how that works. That is, unless you're just all talk.
so you refuse to answer questions, you lose.
so you refuse to answer questions, you lose.
lol
I don't deal in bullshit "if/would". That's for losers like you. I deal in reality.
Now, big talker, you think you're right on the Constitutional question? Then have the balls to be the test case. You won't though. Know why?
YOU'RE A PUSSY!
SmarterthanYou
rebel
the reality of cowards like you who cringe on the inside of the mere thought of someone with a gun in a courtroom, it's also why we have the largest prison population in the world. that's your fault.lol
I don't deal in bullshit "if/would". That's for losers like you. I deal in reality.
i'm not stupid, is why. I KNOW that terrified little cowards like you will DEMAND that people with balls be put away for life because they make you scared.Now, big talker, you think you're right on the Constitutional question? Then have the balls to be the test case. You won't though. Know why?
YOU'RE A PUSSY!
the reality of cowards like you who cringe on the inside of the mere thought of someone with a gun in a courtroom, it's also why we have the largest prison population in the world. that's your fault.
i'm not stupid, is why. I KNOW that terrified little cowards like you will DEMAND that people with balls be put away for life because they make you scared.
People seem to frequently change their names on this forum. I'll change yours for you.
2A PUSSY
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
read US v. Miller, if you have the intelligence to read.
I already have read it and understand why it isn't protected. But, let's just go ahead and go there anyway. Why isn't it protected? There's a larger issue in play here.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
People seem to frequently change their names on this forum. I'll change yours for you.
2A PUSSY
fuck off, coward. you KNOW why you won't answer my question and it's because you're terrified of the people actually having power.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
I already have read it and understand why it isn't protected. But, let's just go ahead and go there anyway. Why isn't it protected? There's a larger issue in play here.
then you actually didn't read the decision, because the justices said that they had no evidence that a short barreled shotgun had any use in a militia type environment, and that is because Miller was dead so NOBODY on his side offered any fucking argument. so say it with me......GUILLE IS A GOVERNMENT STOOGE!!!!!!!!!!!!
fuck off, coward. you KNOW why you won't answer my question and it's because you're terrified of the people actually having power.
lol
Has kind of a rhythm to it, doesn't it? Repeat it a few times. It will grow on you.
2A PUSSY
2A PUSSY
See? Kinda catchy!
Lightbringer
Loves Me Some Souls
then you actually didn't read the decision, because the justices said that they had no evidence that a short barreled shotgun had any use in a militia type environment, and that is because Miller was dead so NOBODY on his side offered any fucking argument. so say it with me......GUILLE IS A GOVERNMENT STOOGE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Let's make this simple then since you seem to be a bit of a cockwobble about this (yeah, I borrowed that from Milagro). Do you think the Heller and McDonald decisions were good law?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
lol
Has kind of a rhythm to it, doesn't it? Repeat it a few times. It will grow on you.
2A PUSSY
2A PUSSY
See? Kinda catchy!
the real coward is the one who wont answer questions. you call it a what/if scenario, but i've already posted several instances where a JURY overruled a law in favor of a defendant, so take a shot, if you're not too terrified, and answer the question
SmarterthanYou
rebel
Let's make this simple then since you seem to be a bit of a cockwobble about this (yeah, I borrowed that from Milagro). Do you think the Heller and McDonald decisions were good law?
no, they were not. heller completely avoided the 2nd Amendment in favor of federal supremacy by stating that since DC isn't a state, they could require a permit, but what DC could not do is deny a permit for superficial reaons. Mcdonald was wrong because all it did was apply a permit status to all 50 states. it completely ignores the whole 'shall not be infringed' portion of the 2nd Amendment.
the real coward is the one who wont answer questions. you call it a what/if scenario, but i've already posted several instances where a JURY overruled a law in favor of a defendant, so take a shot, if you're not too terrified, and answer the question
Let us all know when you plan to take your sawed off shotgun into the courthouse. I want to keep my eyes on the news at that time.
Thanks, in advance, 2A PUSSY