If Gun Confiscation Was Legally Passed and Upheld by the Court...

Yes, that is true. A mandatory buy-back program might not be ruled constitutional by the current Supreme Court.

 

We don't need an argument. We don't need to justify owning a gun to you or anybody else. We neither seek nor ask for your approval.

 

Accually they have not heard a case involving the right of citizens to own military style weapons.

 

That didn't keep Scalia from ruling on it.

I say again, the guy and the ruling are a disaster! They will be easily overturned due to poor reasoning as soon as we have an independent Supreme Court again.

 

Ummmm. In order for a there to be a ruling, there must be a case, what was the case?

 

In a way they have. US v. Miller dealt with the right to own non-military issue weapons (i.e. sawed off shotguns) and they lost on the grounds that sawed off shotguns are not good enough for military purposes. There are enough problems with that case to say they haven't really ruled on it because the lawyers arguing didn't point out that the U.S. military did use sawed off shotguns in WW1.

 

You obviously didn't read the post you are responding to. No, there doesn't need to be case right now. There will need to be a case when the moment I mentioned there comes. But that's the easy part.

 

Usually takes a while to get a case to the SC. Might want to get something started through the lower courts...might miss your chance if it comes.

 

I think it's going to take a while to get a reasonable Supreme Court in place. It's not wise to start the process too early. We don't want to risk the decision falling in the hands of the current gang-of-five partisan justices.

 

You said there was a ruling, you must have a case in order to have a ruling. So were you wrong?

 

Well, good luck finding non partisan judges that will rule favorably on firearm confiscation or weakening of the 2A. That wins oxymoron of the year award. Got to give you credit for thinking big I guess.

 

If you do not like the court now, you really will not like it 4 years from now... LOL

 

Ah. You're talking about that part of my post.

It's fine to drop into a debate already in progress. But then you should look for the context yourself. Fortunately, I happen to have a couple of links to part of that context.


http://politicalforum.com/index.php...ld-by-the-court.561559/page-7#post-1070974652

http://politicalforum.com/index.php...ld-by-the-court.561559/page-8#post-1070975031

 

I was going to address these all separately but it's obvious that you really don't understand the depth of all lawful gun owners belief in the Constitution and the second amendment. Do you understand the second amendment doesn't just protect gun owners rights but yours as well? The second amendment guarantees every American citizen that they will never live under the ruthless control of a tyrannical government. Any rational person can see that there is an extreme leftward faction whose intent is exactly that as evidenced by the present field of low life politicians campaigning on confiscation. Are they really concerned about shooting victims? They couldn't care less, in fact news of a mass shooting is innervating to their loins. The bigger the better, more credence to their perverse cause. I don't expect you to understand since you describe the dictates of a leftist government as a lawful order. Would you obey Stalin? How about Mao or Castro? Maybe Kim Jong Il or Pol Pot? Well that's the kind of company you're keeping with presently there is no denying it, hell they don't even deny it themselves. As for the cheap shot at Trump I obviously don't have to wonder where that comes from or even address it but I will. America at this very moment is better off than any other time in our history because of Donald Trump. The folk you align with lost because America was sick of losing and woefully empty promises. America is sick of being maligned by those who were born on it's soil whose allegiance is not to America. America is sick of hearing that we are racist (feel free to add anything to that) every time we oppose something that is blatantly unAmerican. America is sick of being harassed for not pandering to every mentally ill group that is foisted on us, men in ladies rooms and drag queen story time? C'mon, really? America is sick of the rabbit hole version of reality the left and the media perpetually portray about everything. America, still clings to all that is wholesome and good, the Constitution, even our guns and our bibles, things that don't exist in places like North Korea, China, Cuba, Viet Nam and Laos or any other budding third world leftist utopia. There isn't enough hocus pocus in the left's bullshit that'll ever change that as long as we have our guns. MAGA!!!!!!

 

Ok now I understand, you do not know the difference between a ruling and a opinion. That explains it.

 

So, you expect this agent is going to advertise they are coming to shoot you so you'd be ready to shoot back. I don't think that's how it would work.

Your and your friends guns will not stop a gov't from taking you over if they really want to.
It's a ridiculous argument for owning guns in today's world.

 

People have to be able to have and use nukes if they want to use the tyranny gov't argument.
However, most gun advocates call me silly for suggesting such a thing.

Indicating, they are in favor of control on weapons. Against the 2A.

 

Will you make it legal for me to own a nuke?
How about a machine gun? Tommy gun? A newly mfg'd automatic riflle?

I should not need your approval to own any of them. If I want them to fight some gov't tyranny.

 

They will not weaken the 2nd A. Independent justices will simply interpret it as written.

 

Can you and I own a nuke? Claymore mine? Machine gun?
We shold be able to if you have a belief in the constitution.

 

It's a crazy world we live in, but principles like the rationale behind the second are as sound as ever. We need the ability to remain free, and if that means everybody owning a nuke, then that's what it means.

 

I don't make predictions. I have seen that those who predict something only because they would want it to be true simply make fools of themselves ahead of time. If I predict something you will see a very well reasoned and informed reasoning behind it.. Doesn't mean it's necessarily right, but it means it's educated.

Since I don't see yours... What can I say....

 

You don't make predictions, but when you do make predictions, they are reasoned and educated. Are you pretending there is no bias in those predictions you do not make?

 

I respect your being true to the belief of the 2A and that the constitution imposes no limits. AFAIK.

But I do disagree with everyone owning a nuke. Or anyone for that matter.

And the fact we can't own nukes, means we can take away rights afforded in the constitution.

 

wut? The military has nukes, so why can't we?

The 2nd is very clear on this. Shall not be infringed is as clear now as it ever was.

Your logic is weird. Rights can't be taken away by the government. That's just weird and wrong.