MovieChat Forums > Politics > Big loss for gun control and democrat ty...

Big loss for gun control and democrat tyrants

posted 3 years ago by CraigC (8481)
28 replies | jump to latest

Great quote from Justice Thomas. Suck it.

"We know of no other constitutional right that an individual may exercise only after demonstrating to government officers some special need. That is not how the First Amendment works when it comes to unpopular speech or the free exercise of religion. It is not how the Sixth Amendment works when it comes to a defendant’s right to confront the witnesses against him. And it is not how the Second Amendment works when it comes to public carry for self defense".

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-gun-decision-shoots-down-ny-rule-high-bar-concealed-carry-licenses

[–] kspkap (13570) 3 years ago

You beat me to it!

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 3 years ago

I’m glad at least one branch of government has some degree of common sense, now if we can take back Congress in 2022 and then lock the fucker in chief up we might be able to get things back to normal.

[–] B1cKsurN (17628) 3 years ago

Gun control is racist.

[–] Gd5150 (11851) 3 years ago

The American people just got safer.

[–] Sparky (2660) 3 years ago

It's the 3 in the 6-3 that disturbs though. Breyer et al complaining that justices don't dictate the law rather than interpret it- is the left honest at any time?

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

The Supreme Court Justices are only supposed to interpret the law. Legislators create law.

[–] Sparky (2660) 3 years ago

uh, ya

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

No, they're never honest. That's why those three voted the way they did.

[–] snepts (11123) 3 years ago

If the effing creeps and liars hadn't cheated their way onto the SC, we'd have thoughtful, middle-of-the-road decisions that would benefit the greater populace, not these contorted, perverted ideas that coalition of fascist toadies bends over backwards to rationalize so they can exert control over our citizens who only want peace and meaningful freedom.

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

The Democrats need to add democratic or impartial judges and repeatedly bring cases in front of the Supreme Court to reverse the nonsense about a well-regulated militia being falsely interpreted as individuals.

The Citizens United decision which allows rich people to buy politicians, watered-down voting rights and the impending reversal of abortion rights will also need to be addressed. Do the Democrats even have a plan besides asking for money?

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

".....the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".

Sorry to hear about your piss poor reading comprehension. You read it but you obviously did not understand it. You need to read the other works of the founders to gain a better understanding.

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

And you question my sanity??? We don't need "middle of the road" decisions. We need the Constitution to be honored and upheld. Which is EXACTLY what happened here. Just because you want to live as disarmed, toothless sheep does not give you the right to make the rest of us the same.

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

You're not a well-regulated militia! You would know what a militia is if you bothered to read the entire Constitution.

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

You still playing that game???

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

The Constitution clearly defines a well-regulated militia and it's not you or any other individual.

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

More lies. Lies upon lies.

I'm so glad you're finally reading a document we've known for decades. You're like a puppy that just discovered its pecker!

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

You're not a well-regulated militia!

[–] CowherPower4Ever (241) 3 years ago

The courts have ruled over and over again that Americans are allowed to keep and bear arms. This would be useless to deny. Your militia argument is totally stupid and lazy its just embarrassing at this point.

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

No, they haven't! Historically, the states' legislators wrote gun laws pertaining to individuals. It was also common for them to ban gun ownership for certain groups.

The 2008 Supreme Court decision District of Columbia vs. Heller is the FIRST TIME in American history in which they changed the meaning from states' well-regulated militias to individuals by 5-4.

Prior to that decision, ALL prior cases interpreted it as an amendment pertaining only to militias.

If you knew history, then you'd know that there was a fear that the federal government could become a tyranny and try to disam the different states militias so they couldn't defend themselves against tyranny. The Founding Fathers initially didn't want a permanent federal standing army! see Article 1 Section 8

Furthermore, gun rights didn't become politicized until recently. The NRA used to be about only gun safety until they became more political and began receiving money from gun manufacturers while the GOP was looking for issues.

Whose sock are you?

[–] CowherPower4Ever (241) 3 years ago

The fact you go after me, calling me a sock account, only proves you have nothing to stand on. Americans have a right to keep and bear arms(even Joe Biden believes in Americans rights to keep and bear arms by the way). If you don't like it cry in your basement, not on here.

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

"Prior to that decision, ALL prior cases interpreted it as an amendment pertaining only to militias."

Which is patently false. Like everyone else on your side, you don't seek the truth. You read the Constitution with the intent of twisting the text to fit your chosen narrative.

The NRA became a lobbying entity out of necessity. We shouldn't have to fight every day to keep rights guaranteed by the Constitution but because of people like you, we do. Manufacturers shouldn't have to tolerate the gov't that strictly regulates their industry, sponsoring frivolous lawsuits with the intent of bankrupting them. Because of people like you, they do. You are literally the tyranny the 2nd was written to protect against.

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

Funny how you bring up the Constitution, but you have never read it!

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

You mean when I quoted a Supreme Court justice???

[–] Keelai (35393) 3 years ago

You mean the sex molester?

[–] CraigC (8481) 3 years ago

He spoke the truth. The man shits more intellect than you'll ever possess.

It's a funny thing, every time a conservative is nominated to the Supreme Court, asshole democrats accuse them of sex crimes. Yet your wonderful president really is a pedophile. Liberals are all about minorities, women and alphabet people, unless they're conservative.

[–] SamNoyoun (5933) 3 years ago

That is a good quote, and it makes perfect sense...A surprisingly articulate ruling from Thomas(the OG sex offender of the SCOTUS!)