Zewp.com

Buy Stuff

Zewp Net . Image Index . Upload . Mult Upload . Random Image

> Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Pages: 1 2 3

........................................................................

RockHardConservative
#51 2022-06-24 00:59:23

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#52 2022-06-24 01:02:26

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

RockHardConservative wrote:

Quote from Heller

Why did it take the court over 200 years to make this decision?

The law they struck down today was passed in 1911. Its not like its a new idea.


Why has the law been good for over 100 years?


Seems like someone is being an activist judge.

........................................................................

RockHardConservative
#53 2022-06-24 01:06:05

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

Why did it take the court over 200 years to make this decision?

The law they struck down today was passed in 1911. Its not like its a new idea.


Why has the law been good for over 100 years?


Seems like someone is being an activist judge.

Again, not my problem.

........................................................................

#54 2022-06-24 01:59:53

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

The US is fulfilling Trump’s prophecy to become the bigliest and bestes shythole in the world!!!
Push me, shoot you.
\
trump2

........................................................................

#55 2022-06-24 02:01:37

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

Why did it take the court over 200 years to make this decision?

The law they struck down today was passed in 1911. Its not like its a new idea.


Why has the law been good for over 100 years?


Seems like someone is being an activist judge.

SC judged that 2A is an INDIVDUAL right quite a while back.  I believe Scalia wrote the opinion on it.   You should go find it and learn some things before you spout your leftist nonsense.

........................................................................

#56 2022-06-24 02:16:22

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

Why did it take the court over 200 years to make this decision?

The law they struck down today was passed in 1911. Its not like its a new idea.


Why has the law been good for over 100 years?


Seems like someone is being an activist judge.

So now it's a problem but not when a faggot judge overrules a referendum by the public against faggot marriage?

Hypocrite much?

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#57 2022-06-24 02:43:25

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

wrote:

SC judged that 2A is an INDIVDUAL right quite a while back.  I believe Scalia wrote the opinion on it.   You should go find it and learn some things before you spout your leftist nonsense.

Yees, and Scalia's opinion was at odds with over 200 years of litigation regarding the second amendment.

And, that opion only covered weapons in a home and property, not the right to carry out in public.

The opinion today strikes down a 1911 law. That law didn't come up out of the blue, it was based on even earlier laws.

The second was for 200+ years understood to be a collective right.

Its all about keeping a militia ready when there isn't a standing military.

........................................................................

#58 2022-06-24 03:12:02

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

Yees, and Scalia's opinion was at odds with over 200 years of litigation regarding the second amendment.

And, that opion only covered weapons in a home and property, not the right to carry out in public.

The opinion today strikes down a 1911 law. That law didn't come up out of the blue, it was based on even earlier laws.

The second was for 200+ years understood to be a collective right.

Its all about keeping a militia ready when there isn't a standing military.

They desroyed your arguement with two words.

THE PEOPLE.

Fuq off, you uneducated idiot.

........................................................................

#59 2022-06-24 03:55:15

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Why are you deleting posts, Phil?

........................................................................

Phillip_McCavity
#60 2022-06-24 05:31:24

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

wrote:

They desroyed your arguement with two words.

THE PEOPLE.

Fuq off, you uneducated idiot.

The people who are a part of a well regulated militia.

........................................................................

Suck_It_Phil
#61 2022-06-24 09:28:58

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

The people who are a part of a well regulated militia.

You faggots are still trying to hang your at on the militia nonsense ?

........................................................................

GroomerAU
#62 2022-06-24 10:45:32

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

The people who are a part of a well regulated militia.

You sure are stuck on stupid. Look up how the US defines militias and get back to us.

........................................................................

Ho Chi Minh
#63 2022-06-24 10:48:56

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Spanky wrote:

So citizens should be able to own nuclear arms?

Classic Cognitive Dissonance.

........................................................................

#64 2022-06-24 12:37:22

Re: Very weird firearms decision from the SC

Phillip_McCavity wrote:

As for gun laws, how about Australia? After a mass shooting there, they passed sensible laws, and in fact many people voluntarily handed in their weapons.

The fact is, gun control has worked very well in places where it has been tried.

Nope. Not sensible, draconian. And it has not worked.

........................................................................

Pages: 1 2 3

Amazon Item ID (eg B00WXZ10T0)



Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter