Are these 'infringements'?

There have been hundreds in similar situations

https://www.readfrontier.org/storie...ke-hers-are-becoming-more-common-in-oklahoma/

 

there is some sense in criminalizing using narcotics while pregnant

 

Even when there is very little proof that they are teratogenic? How about alcohol?

https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/fasd/facts.html#:~:text=Table of Contents,a mix of these problems.

There is more evidence that alcohol is teratogenic than methamphetamine. Now if you are prosecuting women for, say, using illegal fentanyl then what about the woman on prescribed fentanyl?

 

Still WAITING for YOU to answer HOW you intend to DEFINE "too many abortions" and whatever TF a "prohibited person" might be.

 

NOT one single gun OWNER stepped up to DEFEND the RIGHTS of someone who was DENIED his Constitutional RIGHTS by a SITTING president in the Oval office THIS century!

It is FARCICAL to claim that "gun rights" PROTECT other rights when that has NEVER happened and probably NEVER will either given the numbers of gun owning white supremacists racists out there.

 

ABYSMAL absence of RELEVANT Subject Matter KNOWLEDGE content duly noted.

SERIOUSLY?

Do you actually BELIEVE that there is a RIGHT to OWN SLAVES given what YOU just posted above?

WTAF?

Slavery is NOT a Constitutional RIGHT!

There is NO right to OWN another person.

 

Do you think the founders even thought about abortion when drafting the constitution? It was a STATE ISSUE. there is nothing about larceny or rape mentioned in the constitution either. or how much interest could be charged on a loan etc

 

People DIE from HYPERTENSION related HEART ATTACKS and STROKES if they are WITHOUT their BP meds.

 

do you consider gun ownership something that only white supremacists support? do you consider that a valid attack on your apparently ever present white supremacists is to push gun bans? or do you support gun bans to attack those who are hostile to the alphabet agenda and its proponents?

 

yep, which is the exact opposite of the issue I raised.

 

Nailed it!

 

Asinine content completely UNRELATED to the point duly noted.

 

It is a WHACK A MOLE thread that is all over the map.

The term "INFRINGEMENT" is like a turd in the hot sun, it attracts bugs and SWATTING bugs is an exercise in futility because there will ALWAYS be another.

There NEVER was any SERIOUS basis to the OP, instead it is just a DISINGENUOUS attempt to CONFLATE a medical procedure with an ABUSED term in the Constitution.

Sad!

 

normal avoidance strategy noted. You clearly have no understanding of the Bruen standard which has zero application to abortion or trans-rights or other social issues that seem to motivate your desire to ban guns

 

LOL. You taught constitutional law.

 

Yep.
And I answered. HIPPA. Medical rights to private medical history.

 

Abortion is a medical procedure, so we'd just have to mandate that the data stays in the medical system and is only able to be accessed by authorized personnel. Any personnel that violate the law, either by abusing access to the system or by providing an abortion to a prohibited person could be fined or imprisoned.

Is that the ONLY thing you think would be an 'infringement'?

 

yes, and I know you did not. You seem to think that 'well regulated' has some modifying impact on "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". You refuse to explain why but you obviously thought it was a valid response though it is absolutely worthless to do what you think it does. Why are you so reticent to explain?

 

What is a prohibited? In an elective medical procedure? Why?

 

Even more farcical is the belief that when it comes to a “fight to maintain our rights” and it escalates to guns being involved that that it will not lead to a bloody civil war. America got lucky that the proud boys did not bring in the cache of weapons to Jan 6 that they had ready - can you imagine what would have happened if they had?

 

"Poor Boys?", meh. How many shots did they fire?

 

That is what happened here in Qld. Police “raided” an abortion clinic and then had to hand back the files red in the face as they did not have the right to access private medical information

 

Sorry typo and it was actually the “oath keepers” and I said it was lucky that they did not bring the cache they had on standby

https://apnews.com/article/capitol-...and-politics-6ac80882e8cf61af36be6c46252ac24c

What do you think would have happened if that cache had been activated?

 

I think there more just a LW whipping boy than any read threat to do more than minor damage. More of a talking point for the left than a real threat.

 

I live in rural Virginia. I'd wager my neighborhood has a bigger "cache" every day of the week. May as well worry what would happen if an earthquake suddenly opened a fissure and swallowed the Capitol whole.