Do you notice how gun control legislation proposed by democrats never has anything to fo with banning all guns or going to…

[sealybobo]

You mad bro?

No we are just potentially ruining their lives due to a bunch of fetishists trying to become a protected class.

And again, we SIMPLY DONT TRUST YOU when it comes to fairly implementing things like red flag laws, because your side won't. They will use them to remove guns from people for the hell of it, for the flimsiest of reasons, and that person loses their RKBA with a drawn out process designed to make them just give up.

No we won't. You're just mad, bro.

My brothers neighbor is this liberal single woman with a kid. Then she married a black guy. A professor. Seemed nice but after several years she just threw him out because all he does is play video games all night when he gets home.

Her daughter was this absolutely adorable little girl. Now she's an ugly teen boy. WTF???

I can't help but think how all these liberal choices she made have come back to bite her in the ass. Being married to a lazy black guy and having a daughter who thinks she's a boy. I wonder is she's still as liberal as she once was.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

…people’s homes to confiscate guns already owned? Even if we banned sales of AR-15’s, it doesn’t somehow mean it would involve taking them from existing gun owners. Republicans entertain this specific idea because it makes them feel manly and tough picturing some suit showing up and saying “give me your guns! I’m here to collect!” They would respond with “come take it mother fucker! Derp, derp, derp!”

The whole thing is a silly, childish fantasy but that’s how they think.

If we already make it illegal for kids to buy guns from businesses, why would it be unconstitutional to add further restrictions? The 2nd amendment clearly already has limitations and always has.

Schumer tells Democrats to "keep talking" to GOP about gun legislation

"We know we're not going to get everything we want," Schumer said.

www.axios.com

You lying buttfucking communist shit.

We already said that you want incremental but ultimate ban and confiscation.

YOU ARE LIARS

YOU GET NOTHING

THE END

 

[sealybobo]

Who is all those things? The public? Nah no way. I mean already the constitution is being violated. Come on, proficiency? Plenty of morons who know very little about guns own them. Accidental shootings happen all the time as a result. And what context are you even referring to with being organized?

So you have to prove you are proficient, disciplined and organized when you try to get a drivers licence but you don't have to prove you are even sane to get a gun?

I think we need better background checks. If you pass them, buy any gun you want. Have at it. But if you don't pass the background check, you don't get a gun. If you have violence in your past. Doesn't have to be a felony. If we find out that you've made threats at school, you don't get a gun. Try again in another year. We will only look at your behavior over the past year. But getting your first gun should be a big deal. We don't just pass them out to anyone.

But unfortunately that's exactly what we do now.

 

[22lcidw]

…people’s homes to confiscate guns already owned? Even if we banned sales of AR-15’s, it doesn’t somehow mean it would involve taking them from existing gun owners. Republicans entertain this specific idea because it makes them feel manly and tough picturing some suit showing up and saying “give me your guns! I’m here to collect!” They would respond with “come take it mother fucker! Derp, derp, derp!”

The whole thing is a silly, childish fantasy but that’s how they think.

If we already make it illegal for kids to buy guns from businesses, why would it be unconstitutional to add further restrictions? The 2nd amendment clearly already has limitations and always has.

Schumer tells Democrats to "keep talking" to GOP about gun legislation

"We know we're not going to get everything we want," Schumer said.

www.axios.com

Progs never stop when their foot is in the door for agendas. Repubs never learn or are paid off to be sellouts in mostly one way bipartisan agreements.

 

[sealybobo]

You lying buttfucking communist shit.

We already said that you want incremental but ultimate ban and confiscation.

YOU ARE LIARS

YOU GET NOTHING

THE END

We don't want to confiscate all guns. Just yours. And anyone involved in January 6th insurrection.

 

[sealybobo]

You lying buttfucking communist shit.

We already said that you want incremental but ultimate ban and confiscation.

YOU ARE LIARS

YOU GET NOTHING

THE END

Did you hear about the new law? You can buy an AR15. It's just against the law to manufacture, sell or buy bullets for it. LOL.

Have fun with your empty gun dummy.

 

[krichton]

Gun nuts are still lamenting the fact that we can't buy rpgs, mortars and grenades for home defense and hunting, so it's no wonder they freak out whenever anyone even mentions a peep about gun regulations.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

We don't want to confiscate all guns. Just yours. And anyone involved in January 6th insurrection.

Come get them.

 

[Flash]

We already have limitations stupid. And they aren't illegal.

Can you carry a gun around with you in MI concealed without a permit? Nope. And it's perfectly legal, stupid.

The hell they ain't Moon Bat.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

If the state puts limitations on the right to keep and bear arms then it sure as hell is an infringement and it is fucking illegal as hell.

Just because we let the butt pirates get away with it doesn't mean it is any less illegal.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

NO

NEW

GUN

LEGISLATION

PERIOD

 

[TNHarley]

Gun nuts are still lamenting the fact that we can't buy rpgs, mortars and grenades for home defense and hunting, so it's no wonder they freak out whenever anyone even mentions a peep about gun regulations.

You can, actually.
This is why no one listens to you federal supremacists, except your ilk. You are all dumb as fuck.

 

[sealybobo]

The hell they ain't Moon Bat.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

If the state puts limitations on the right to keep and bear arms then it sure as hell is an infringement and it is fucking illegal as hell.

Just because we let the butt pirates get away with it doesn't mean it is any less illegal.

So a 5 year old can own a gun stupid?

It also says a well regulated militia. Are you well regulated?

 

[sealybobo]

The hell they ain't Moon Bat.

The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

If the state puts limitations on the right to keep and bear arms then it sure as hell is an infringement and it is fucking illegal as hell.

Just because we let the butt pirates get away with it doesn't mean it is any less illegal.

You have human rights

Human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other status. Human rights include the right to life and liberty, freedom from slavery and torture, freedom of opinion and expression, the right to work and education, and many more. Everyone is entitled to these rights, without discrimination.

You have constitutional rights because some politicians wrote the constitution. So politicians can alter the constitution if there are flaws in it. Or add things. Or amend things. Right? Or clarify. Because you aren't a well regulated militia. And they never said how powerful the guns could be. Or how old you had to be. They had muzzle loaders back then.

In the bitter debate over gun control, battle lines are often drawn around the Second Amendment, with many in favor of gun rights pointing to it as the source of their constitutional authority to bear arms, and some in favor of tighter gun control disagreeing with that interpretation.

But if the purpose of the debate is to reduce the tragic human toll of gun violence, the focus on Second Amendment is often misplaced, according to many experts on guns and the Constitution.

Adam Winkler, a professor of law at the UCLA School of Law, also said the Second Amendment is losing its legal relevance in distinguishing lawful policies from unlawful ones as the gap between what he calls the "judicial Second Amendment" and the "aspirational Second Amendment" widens.

Winkler defines the "judicial Second Amendment" as how courts interpret the constitutional provision in their decisions, and the "aspirational Second Amendment" as how the amendment is used in political dialogue. The latter is "far more hostile to gun laws than the judicial one," he said -- and also more prevalent.

"State law is embracing such a robust, anti-regulatory view of the right to keep and bear arms that the judicial Second Amendment, at least as currently construed, seems likely to have less and less to say about the shape of America's gun laws."

"In the judicial Second Amendment, gun rights advocates haven't found that much protection," Winkler said. "Where they found protection was by getting state legislatures, in the name of the Second Amendment, to legislate for permissive gun laws."

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution reads in full:

"A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The role of the Second Amendment, like many constitutional rights, is to put limits on what regulations the federal government can pass, and scholars and lawyers have debated its scope since it was ratified in 1791.

Before the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008, much of the debate revolved around the meaning of a "well-regulated militia." The Heller decision struck down a handgun ban in Washington, D.C., and established the right for individuals to have a gun for certain private purposes including self-defense in the home. The court expanded private gun ownership protection two years later in McDonald v. City of Chicago, determining that state and local governments are also bound to the Second Amendment.

"The Bill of Rights, by its terms, only applies to the federal government, but the Supreme Court, through a doctrine known as incorporation, has made almost all of its guarantees applicable against state and local governments as well. That's what the question was in McDonald," Blocher said. "But some states have chosen to go above and beyond what the court laid out."

Notably, the court in Heller carved out limitations on that individual right and preserved a relatively broad range of possible gun regulation -- such as allowing for their restriction in government buildings, schools and polling places -- but in many instances, state legislatures have decided not to use the authority that the court has granted them.

"Most states have chosen not to use their full regulatory authority," Blocher said. "If a state decides not to forbid people from having large-capacity magazines, for instance, that doesn't necessarily result in a law. It can be the absence of a law that has the most impact."

Why the Second Amendment may be losing relevance in gun debate

The Second Amendment is often misplaced and overrated in the debate over guns in America, according to many experts on guns and the Constitution.

abcnews.go.com

 

[Billy000]

Not that you actually give a shit, but read the federalist papers. You have no clue.

Just sum up what I am referring to.

 

[marvin martian]

So you have to prove you are proficient, disciplined and organized when you try to get a drivers licence but you don't have to prove you are even sane to get a gun?

I think we need better background checks. If you pass them, buy any gun you want. Have at it. But if you don't pass the background check, you don't get a gun. If you have violence in your past. Doesn't have to be a felony. If we find out that you've made threats at school, you don't get a gun. Try again in another year. We will only look at your behavior over the past year. But getting your first gun should be a big deal. We don't just pass them out to anyone.

But unfortunately that's exactly what we do now.

The federal form 4473 asks those questions. The form is required for all firearm purchases. It's the same form Hunter Biden lied on when he illegally purchased a handgun in 2017. Until Biden and all the DemoKKKrats prosecute that crime, anything they say about guns is illegitimate and deserves no attention.

 

[sealybobo]

The federal form 4473 asks those questions. The form is required for all firearm purchases. It's the same form Hunter Biden lied on when he illegally purchased a handgun in 2017. Until Biden and all the DemoKKKrats prosecute that crime, anything they say about guns is illegitimate and deserves no attention.

Boy you guys really hate Hunter huh? LOL.

 

[eagle1462010]

…people’s homes to confiscate guns already owned? Even if we banned sales of AR-15’s, it doesn’t somehow mean it would involve taking them from existing gun owners. Republicans entertain this specific idea because it makes them feel manly and tough picturing some suit showing up and saying “give me your guns! I’m here to collect!” They would respond with “come take it mother fucker! Derp, derp, derp!”

The whole thing is a silly, childish fantasy but that’s how they think.

If we already make it illegal for kids to buy guns from businesses, why would it be unconstitutional to add further restrictions? The 2nd amendment clearly already has limitations and always has.

Schumer tells Democrats to "keep talking" to GOP about gun legislation

"We know we're not going to get everything we want," Schumer said.

www.axios.com

You are a den of thieves and liars.

 

[marvin martian]

Boy you guys really hate Hunter huh? LOL.

Seems like you're defending illegal gun purchases, right?

 

[eagle1462010]

Boy you guys really hate Hunter huh? LOL.

Hes a dirt bag.

 

[sealybobo]

The federal form 4473 asks those questions. The form is required for all firearm purchases. It's the same form Hunter Biden lied on when he illegally purchased a handgun in 2017. Until Biden and all the DemoKKKrats prosecute that crime, anything they say about guns is illegitimate and deserves no attention.

Hunter is a great example of white privilege and privilege that comes when your daddy has money.

He could be the poster child for it. But then so could the Trump boys.