Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Heller did no such thing. All supreme court's have referenced Miller vs US as the standard. And FYI supreme court's rulings when it comes to constitutionally protected rights are never over turned. Miller you dumb son of a bitch started the in common use defense of the second amendment which all supreme court's have used. Simp you need to take a few classes.God what a flippin dumbass. Heller overturned the precedent that was Miller you stupid shit. And he never even mentions Miller in his opinion.
It was exactly self defense, as Adams, and Jefferson pointed out…the quotes are earlier in the thread…Don't need an amendment to pass laws against particular guns. You have the right to bear "arms", you don't have the right to bear any arms. Scalia even said that in the Heller decision.
But yesterday I posed a question, "What is the purpose of the second amendment? Why is it in the Bill of Rights? And not a single damn gun nut has been able to answer that question. It is not there for self-defense, hell the founders spent more time arguing that people shouldn't be forced to own a gun with the Quakers in mind. Self-defense, I don't even think it was mentioned in the Constitutional Convention, and for good reason. Private ownership of guns was dangerous. A musket against a skilled Native American archer is about like the modern equivalent of bringing a knife to a gunfight. The bow was more accurate and had a faster reload. Nine times out of ten, that "arm" ended in the hands of the enemy. Hell, that was the very reason the British were headed to the armory in the Battle of Lexington and Concord.
So come on, someone tell me the purpose of the second amendment.
Wow, I mean just, "Wow". So Constitutional protected rights can never be overturned? Seriously, I mean you are stupid enough to make that claim just months after Rowe was overturned? Miller WAS the standard, after Heller that is no longer the case.Heller did no such thing. All supreme court's have referenced Miller vs US as the standard. And FYI supreme court's rulings when it comes to constitutionally protected rights are never over turned. Miller you dumb son of a bitch started the in common use defense of the second amendment which all supreme court's have used. Simp you need to take a few classes.
www.civicsnation.org
The second amendment was never about self-defense, until Heller. It was always about a militia and it stemmed from the founder's fear of a standing army. I mean that is like US History 101.It was exactly self defense, as Adams, and Jefferson pointed out…the quotes are earlier in the thread…
Look you under educated fuck Miller was the only supreme court ruling dealing with firearms. McDonald addressed the right to keep and bear arms it affirmed miller and used miller as a reference in common use. Heller ruled on the individual right. And Bruen ruled on the right to carry. All three courts referenced Miller weapons in common use.Wow, I mean just, "Wow". So Constitutional protected rights can never be overturned? Seriously, I mean you are stupid enough to make that claim just months after Rowe was overturned? Miller WAS the standard, after Heller that is no longer the case.
In the 1939 case, United States vs. Miller, the court stated in a unanimous decision that the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment was to “assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of” the state militia and that it “must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.” In reversing this precedent in the Heller case, the 2008 Supreme Court justices drastically changed how American citizens interact with guns.
Gun Rights: Before and After Heller - Civics Nation
Before the 2008 Heller decision, the Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment several times. Heller was a drastic departure from past rulings.
You got that, "reversing the precedent"?
Quote where in the Constuitution you have a right to an abortion.Wow, I mean just, "Wow". So Constitutional protected rights can never be overturned? Seriously, I mean you are stupid enough to make that claim just months after Rowe was overturned? Miller WAS the standard, after Heller that is no longer the case.
In the 1939 case, United States vs. Miller, the court stated in a unanimous decision that the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment was to “assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of” the state militia and that it “must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.” In reversing this precedent in the Heller case, the 2008 Supreme Court justices drastically changed how American citizens interact with guns.
Gun Rights: Before and After Heller - Civics Nation
Before the 2008 Heller decision, the Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment several times. Heller was a drastic departure from past rulings.
You got that, "reversing the precedent"?
That standard...until Heller was in regards to the militiaAll supreme court's have referenced Miller vs US as the standard.
Again all Supreme court's have referenced miller. Everyone dealing with the second amendment. "IN COMMON USE"That standard...until Heller was in regards to the militia
Cruikshank and Miller both ruled on the 2A in regards to it's need relating to the militia
Cruikshank was in the 1870s retard. Miller was in the 30sAgain all Supreme court's have referenced miller. Everyone dealing with the second amendment. "IN COMMON USE"
Give it up dumbshit. There are almost a dozen cases dealing with gun rights in which the SCOTUS has rendered a judgement. Miller is most certainly not the "only" one. And interesting that you mention McDonald, which utilizes the due process clause of the 14th amendment to prevent states from nullifying the second amendment and reversed Cruikshank. Interesting because that is precisely the justification for the ruling in Rowe v. Wade. So now McDonald can be attacked.Look you under educated fuck Miller was the only supreme court ruling dealing with firearms. McDonald addressed the right to keep and bear arms it affirmed miller and used miller as a reference in common use. Heller ruled on the individual right. And Bruen ruled on the right to carry. All three courts referenced Miller weapons in common use.
Keep showing your ignorance simp.
Once again from Miller on the term in common used has been referenced all because of miller.Cruikshank was in the 1870s retard. Miller was in the 30s
And both talked about guns in their relationship to militia use.
You're wrong as usualGive it up dumbshit. There are almost a dozen cases dealing with gun rights in which the SCOTUS has rendered a judgement. Miller is most certainly not the "only" one. And interesting that you mention McDonald, which utilizes the due process clause of the 14th amendment to prevent states from nullifying the second amendment and reversed Cruikshank. Interesting because that is precisely the justification for the ruling in Rowe v. Wade. So now McDonald can be attacked.
That is the thing with you right wingers. The historical revisionism and judicial creationism you use will eventually come back and bite you in the ass. The reversal of Miller only makes it easier to ban those assault rifles. From Scalia, "small arms in common use AT THE TIME", so those are the only weapons that are protected by the second amendment. Semi-automatics are not in that genre. Assault weapons most certainly are not.
Wow, I mean just, "Wow". So Constitutional protected rights can never be overturned? Seriously, I mean you are stupid enough to make that claim just months after Rowe was overturned? Miller WAS the standard, after Heller that is no longer the case.
In the 1939 case, United States vs. Miller, the court stated in a unanimous decision that the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment was to “assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of” the state militia and that it “must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.” In reversing this precedent in the Heller case, the 2008 Supreme Court justices drastically changed how American citizens interact with guns.
Gun Rights: Before and After Heller - Civics Nation
Before the 2008 Heller decision, the Supreme Court interpreted the Second Amendment several times. Heller was a drastic departure from past rulings.
You got that, "reversing the precedent"?
Yes, they should not ban the private ownership of semi-automatic weapons, they should ban the manufacturing of them, except for military uses. Law enforcement can use single action pistols, bolt action rifles, and double barreled shotguns. I mean all you semi-automatic nuts must be some piss poor shots. You can't participate in cowboy shooting competitions, and while I might concede the advantage of having a semi-auto shotgun while dove hunting, no one should be hunting doves to start with.
To be honest, those that yield a semi-auto have adopted the spray and pray strategy, like during the Iraq War. 250,000 rounds fired for every insurgent killed. You guys are an insult to the skill of marksmanship. Daniel Morgan is rolling in his grave.
He's a poorly educated simpletonLol!!! You're going to compare a Bill of Rights Amendment to "abortion rights"?
“The idea we still allow semi-automatic weapons to be purchased is sick. Just sick," Biden said on Thanksgiving Day.The sonofabitch stole an election, destroyed energy independence, allowed millions of Illegals to flood in, decreased family income and caused massive inflation and then he calls somebody that buys a Ruger 10-22 "sick"? LOL! The idiots that voted for him are the sickos.
its only "the question" for morons incapable of reading.Why is the question.
Yes. Military grade weapons shouldn't be sold to ordinary people.Do you agree with Biden when he says: "The idea we still allow semi-automatic weapons to be purchased is sick" ?
So all those schoolchildren killed are the price that's needed to be paid so you can pretend that you're a badass with your big guns? Geez, we're doomed.More parents murder their children than dies by a semi automatic rifle. And 61 is not that many. Freedom has a price
So how many mass shootings is ok with you? 100? 200? More?Prove we've had over 600 mass shootings or you're just a liar.
