Supreme Court strikes New York gun law in major ruling

They can't. But that won't stop them from trying.

 

It's known.

 

They didn't. The mistake is the modern misinterpretation

 

I see several gun magazines on every Wal Mart mag rack. Look up "Firearm news magazines"

 

Come to West VA then and see how your fantasy works. High percentage of houses with firearms. But it might not turn out like you think it would.

 

CANCELLED: Lawyers Who Won Major Gun Rights Case Forced Out of Firm.

Some of "the left pressures these law firms to drop clients that they disagree with politically while piously proclaiming that terrorists deserve the best legal representation."

They reveal themselves and we will remember.

 

I know four people who have experienced home invations. I am not going to spend time repeating the specifics which I have done previously on political forum. It gets old repeating the same information over and over for long time members. I will just say that three of the 4 lived in upper middle class houses in VA. One lived in a high end blue collar neighborhood in Western MD. In one case the people were woken up by their small dog barking while their large dog who attacked one of the home invaders. But the dog did not preclude the need use a gun for shall we say situation resolution.

Your where do you live question reflects the typical liberal fantasy that they can avoid crime because they have money and live in a so called good neighborhood. Of course liberals use the term "good neighborhood" as a code work if you get my drift and I think you do.

Didn't you just post something yesterday advocating open borders. Sure, lets have open borders and disarm the honest citizens. What could go wrong.

 

Of course that was wrong. That’s my point!

 

Really, so you are telling us that the Governor of New York didn't call for a special session to address the Court's idiocy?
https://abc7ny.com/supreme-court-guns-new-york-concealed-carry-kathy-hochul-eric-adams/11990327/

 

Wait a minute, am I missing something, but are you saying anecdotally cause you know four people who have had their homes broken into that that justifies everyone in America having a gun ready just in case someone breaks into their house?

 

Here's a fool deceiving himself...

McConnell says he hopes the bipartisan gun bill 'will be viewed favorably by voters in the suburbs we need to regain'

He's right.... the gun bill will be viewed favorably by voters in the suburbs.... and they'll correctly blame the GQP for taking SO ****ing long to get even here, and hopefully vote accordingly...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/mcconnell-says-hopes-bipartisan-gun-141528839.html

Most suburbanites frown on fascist maggots...

 

No one said you're required to keep a gun ready it's a personal choice.

If you would rather roll the dice and take your chances depending on the police with your family safety you go right ahead

 

Which is one of many reasons that few people ever want to go to West Virginia, for anything

 

Rolling the dice is what you are taking even bringing a gun into your house, the probability of you or someone close to you being a victim of gun violence quadruples or more just by making the gun with arm's reach

 

Correct, coming the day after Mitch's Court made guns easier to carry the vanilla gun bill ain't even going to be noticed by most

 

The modern interpretation is literal and is supported by historical context. You're claiming that the right of the "people" to keep and bear arms wasn't what they intended to say. It's an absurd suggestion, but you've made it repeatedly now.

 

No it isn't, as I said before, Scalia's Originalism, which you are using here, is bogus, was only a sophomoric rationalization on his part to justify what he always intended to do

And in terms of "what they intended," no one knows, almost absurd to assume that anyone knows what they intended, to do so, would be ignoring how far we have come in two hundred years plus

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and Constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand and hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.” - Thomas Jefferson

 

And owning a vehicle increases your chances of getting into an accident....

 

By people on this forum. But nobody here knows where I live, outside of the State and Metro Area. And the Tampa Bay area is pretty big, you draw a circle 10-15 miles around my house and the population is the same as NYC. And half of that space is water. (I also think half of those people are from NYC, too, including me.)

So good luck with that...

 

I mean its known by anyone examining your house closely.

 

You could not be more wrong. People are streaming here into the panhandle in droves from MD and VA. One of my neighbors telecommutes to Manhattan. When he first moved here, him and his wife came over to introduce themselves and they later told me that after seeing my Trump signs they wondered if they would be shot. Now, they claim to be more conservative than I am and probably are. lol

Hopefully, not too many liberals will come here. Because often when they flee States that are turning to sh*t because of liberalism they want to vote for liberals and recreate what they fled from.

The places I find that few people want to I want to go to are Baltimore and NYC. Even my liberal relatives that live in MD will no longer go to NYC, a place they used to love to visit, because of the crime.

And where do your people want to go to in the US? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

'
Not at all. I think they meant the Amendment to provide for a militia but only for as long as a militia was necessary. A militia isn't necessary and hasn't been for well over a century. Neither is the amendment.

 

Sorry for the confusion. I was agreeing with you it was wrong. I did get your point.

 

Why won't the DNC go on record, i.e,, make it part of their platform, to repeal the 2nd Amendment?

 

I'm not sure Scalia can claim "originalism" as his own creation, as there were originalists both before him and since. I'm one of them, and I became so the moment I finished reading the Constitution from cover to cover the first time, if not even before I was finished. The government proscribed by the Constitution is small, and doesn't do all that much. Not only does not, it can't, as in doesn't have the authority for. Something we forgot a very long time ago, before most of the inhabitants of this board were even born.

Laws and institutions can change, but not by simply being ignored, or changed by judicial fiat. You see, there's a process called "amending the Constitution", and the way it's done is to propose one, probably have a lot of hearings and other bs, then get it passed through Congress (which means both the House & Senate) by a 2/3rds majority, and then by the States by a 3/4ths majority of their Legislatures, which is 38. If you don't like the 2nd Amendment you can through that process. It's not easy, but it's not supposed to be. But it shouldn't be "repeal through ignorance" which means just collectively pretending it doesn't exist, or doesn't say what it says, though that is a popular idea around here. It should be done, if possible, via Amendment, a process that frankly we don't use enough. FFS, the US Air Force isn't even Constitutionally authorized because they were too lazy to get an Amendment, which would be easy peasy for that specific change. Not so much to alter or repeal the 2A, but to authorize the Air Force? Piece of cake, they could get it done in a few days if they really tried.

It makes complete sense that there is no authorization for an Air Force, as there was no such thing as an airplane when the Constitution was written, but that is but one example of why the amendment process exists for the changes TJeff was talking about. Which he was well aware of, hell, it was probably his idea to begin with.