Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?

[Daryl Hunt]

Read the 10th again.

No need to read it again. I’m pretty much the world’s leading authority on the 10th Amendment. It in no way eliminated the Supremacy Clause. It says anything not in the constitution is left to the states. The 2nd Amendment is clearly in the U.S. Constitution, cupcake.

Hmm, not according to the many Federal Courts, it doesn't.

What federal court stated that the 10th Amendment eliminated the U.S. Constitution and overrode the 2nd Amendment?

It is really bizarre how you think you can make stuff up and people will believe it. What gives you such grandiose delusions? Why do you think people will blindly accept your internet propaganda?

No court ruling stated any changed in the 10th but there has been plenty suggesting change in the 2nd. The Courts cannot change the Constitution. What they can do is interpret it when the Constitution no longer applies. In the case of the 2nd, that is where we are right now. This is why your interpretation of the 2nd greatly disagrees with the Federal Courts. When that happens, that means that the US Congress is remiss in doing their frigging jobs. They are too busy playing partisan grab ass than to do their jobs.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

The only exception is under the Heller Ruling which only dealt with normal handguns. In other words, you have the right to have a normal, traditional, serviceable handgun in your home as long as you comply with the regulations and laws of the area that you are in. And the area you are in has to offer attainable regulations so that a normal person may obtain it. That is Heller V in a nutshell. All other things pertaining to firearms belongs to the States and lower Governments. So Heller V does comply with the 2nd amendment. Yah, I know you want it to say something else by presenting the Dissenting View but dissenting means the losers views and has no legal standings.

Courts can’t make law from the bench. Courts also can’t overrule the U.S. Constitution. The fact that you have to point to court rulings prove that you’re wrong and you know it. Remember, at one time, courts upheld slavery, preventing women from voting, separate but equal, etc. I could go on and on and on. Eventually, all of it got corrected. The same will happen with the 2nd Amendment.

Now, with that in mind, try reading the U.S. Constitution just once before you die.

When the laws contradict with themselves the courts can and do rule against the laws. I have seen some pretty nasty comments by the Supreme Court Justices when this happens. But they make the ruling anyway. And that ruling stands. In the 2nd amendment's case, there isn't enough there to overrule the Courts rulings. If want to overrule those decisions you are going to have to have Congress rewrite the 2nd and say what you want it to say. And it has to be specific,not generalized like it is now. The Courts are adamant about that.

Now, with a mind, reread the 2nd and the 10th amendment again before you die.

 

[NoVote]

Do you notice how gun nuts never talk about any limits to gun ownership?

Ever notice how libtards always overblow the facts to fit THEIR narrative? Gun freaks who spend all their money on guns are maybe, oh, one in a million, and most of those are democraps. They really are nuts. most people into home defense buy a pistol or two a long gun or a shotgun.

Get over it tard, and by the way, read my footer before you go back in the basement at moms, MmK?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Hmm, not according to the many Federal Courts, it doesn't. Since it doesn't, that means the states have the right to regulate firearms as long as due process is used. The only exception is under the Heller Ruling which only dealt with normal handguns.

Both of these statement are lies.
Why do you need to lie to make a point?

 

[P@triot]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

 

[P@triot]

What federal court stated that the 10th Amendment eliminated the U.S. Constitution and overrode the 2nd Amendment?

It is really bizarre how you think you can make stuff up and people will believe it. What gives you such grandiose delusions? Why do you think people will blindly accept your internet propaganda?

No court ruling stated any changed in the 10th[/QUOTE]
That’s not what I asked. I asked what federal court stated that the 10th Amendment eliminated the U.S. Constitution and overrode the 2nd Amendment? That was your outrageous claim. So tell us which federal court made that declaration or admit you lied.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking . Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. You do have right to grow another arm if your genetics and mutation allows it. It says so right in the 2nd amendment.

How is that for a straight forward reading of the Amendment where I am not reading anything in and am taking it at face value. Now it makes sense, doesn't it. You are right. When we read it verbatum, we don't need to clarify it at all. It's crystal clear.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

What federal court stated that the 10th Amendment eliminated the U.S. Constitution and overrode the 2nd Amendment?

It is really bizarre how you think you can make stuff up and people will believe it. What gives you such grandiose delusions? Why do you think people will blindly accept your internet propaganda?

No court ruling stated any changed in the 10th

That’s not what I asked. I asked what federal court stated that the 10th Amendment eliminated the U.S. Constitution and overrode the 2nd Amendment? That was your outrageous claim. So tell us which federal court made that declaration or admit you lied.[/QUOTE]

You seem to read in what you want to read in. I posed something even better. I reread the 2nd amendment and concur. If we read it exactly as written, you have the right to bear arms. You can bear your arms just by going sleaveless all you want. It's your right. It's right in the Constitution. But there is no mention of anything about Firearms at all. Just arms. You have a left one and a right one at birth. Care for them. Some are not so lucky to be able bear arms. Some can only bear arm while others don't have any arms to bear. Shiva can bear 8 arms and still be in compliance with thee 2nd amendment. You can't read into it. You must either take it verbatum, update the damned thing in Congress or allow the courts to keep making the rulings which in affect makes the laws which is not the way the system was intended to happen.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking . Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. You do have right to grow another arm if your genetics and mutation allows it. It says so right in the 2nd amendment.

How is that for a straight forward reading of the Amendment where I am not reading anything in and am taking it at face value. Now it makes sense, doesn't it. You are right. When we read it verbatum, we don't need to clarify it at all. It's crystal clear.

" Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. "

You're a Prog dumb fuck.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking . Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. You do have right to grow another arm if your genetics and mutation allows it. It says so right in the 2nd amendment.

How is that for a straight forward reading of the Amendment where I am not reading anything in and am taking it at face value. Now it makes sense, doesn't it. You are right. When we read it verbatum, we don't need to clarify it at all. It's crystal clear.

" Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. "

You're a Prog dumb fuck.

Hey, I am not the one that wanted to use it in the literal sense. But since you rightwinggunnutters want to, let's do it. Now, tell me again that the 2nd amendment doesn't need updated. When you use it in the literal sense as you people have been hammering us to do, all of a sudden it has an entirely different meaning.

 

[progressive hunter]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking . Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. You do have right to grow another arm if your genetics and mutation allows it. It says so right in the 2nd amendment.

How is that for a straight forward reading of the Amendment where I am not reading anything in and am taking it at face value. Now it makes sense, doesn't it. You are right. When we read it verbatum, we don't need to clarify it at all. It's crystal clear.

" Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. "

You're a Prog dumb fuck.

Hey, I am not the one that wanted to use it in the literal sense. But since you rightwinggunnutters want to, let's do it. Now, tell me again that the 2nd amendment doesn't need updated. When you use it in the literal sense as you people have been hammering us to do, all of a sudden it has an entirely different meaning.

daryl are you ever going to tell us what an update would look like if you wrote it????

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking .

You are a very stubborn uneducated stupid asshole. Nothing I can do about that. Medical science is baffled for a cure for that.

 

[Ambivalent1]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking . Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. You do have right to grow another arm if your genetics and mutation allows it. It says so right in the 2nd amendment.

How is that for a straight forward reading of the Amendment where I am not reading anything in and am taking it at face value. Now it makes sense, doesn't it. You are right. When we read it verbatum, we don't need to clarify it at all. It's crystal clear.

" Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. "

You're a Prog dumb fuck.

Hey, I am not the one that wanted to use it in the literal sense. But since you rightwinggunnutters want to, let's do it. Now, tell me again that the 2nd amendment doesn't need updated. When you use it in the literal sense as you people have been hammering us to do, all of a sudden it has an entirely different meaning.

You're an idiot.
I have a gun in each hand, watchu gon do???

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking . Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. You do have right to grow another arm if your genetics and mutation allows it. It says so right in the 2nd amendment.

How is that for a straight forward reading of the Amendment where I am not reading anything in and am taking it at face value. Now it makes sense, doesn't it. You are right. When we read it verbatum, we don't need to clarify it at all. It's crystal clear.

" Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. "

You're a Prog dumb fuck.

Hey, I am not the one that wanted to use it in the literal sense. But since you rightwinggunnutters want to, let's do it. Now, tell me again that the 2nd amendment doesn't need updated. When you use it in the literal sense as you people have been hammering us to do, all of a sudden it has an entirely different meaning.

daryl are you ever going to tell us what an update would look like if you wrote it????

I am going to have to give that some thought. I was hoping we could hash it out as a group so everything gets considered. One person may not be smart enough to get it right the first time. And I imagine if I do present something, it's going to be bullied and beaten even if it does make sense. But trust me, it's not going to give the Feds an damned thing with the exception of controlling really extraordinary weapons much like it does now like the big nasty stuff and full auto weapons.

But I would probably add just the Heller Ruling with it leaving everything else to the States and lower governments. Okay, here goes.

We keep the 1934 Firearms Act.

We combine the 1934 Firearms Act with Heller V. D.C. and the 1998 Firearms Act. We also add in ALL gun sales require background checks because those may cross state lines. We don't rewrite the 2nd amendment since that amendment no longer makes any sense in todays world. So we introduce a new Amendment. Then the 10th can be the force behind the State Rights on the rest of it much like it is today. No new real laws written only the compilation of existing laws and current the one ruling rulings refer back to anyway.

The reason we completely dump the 2nd amendment is that we no longer have the ability to have an organized Militia. Add to the fact, even without that idea, the US Military doesn't have the horsepower to actually take on the Civilian population on a protracted time period and win if the worst fears came to be and the military actually did back the bad Federal Government. Then add in the fact the Military would not follow an illegal government, it's in their UCMJ which is their Constitution. Trust me, the Federal Government fears us much more than we should fear them.

 

[satrebil]

We keep the 1934 Firearms Act.

We combine the 1934 Firearms Act with Heller V. D.C. and the 1998 Firearms Act. We also add in ALL gun sales require background checks because those may cross state lines.

Why? If I can pass a background check to own a firearm, why should it matter what firearm I own?

 

[Daryl Hunt]

Yet, you won't correct the 2nd amendment

That’s because there is nothing to “correct”. It’s flawless the way it is.

even though it no longer serves the original purpose it once did. Why, because it plays into your Rexall Ranger persona.

It serves the exact purpose it was intended to serve: ensuring American citizens have the right to keep and bear arms. Protecting them from oppressive fascists such as yourself.

Yes, you have the right to bear arms. You have two of them. But says nothing about bearing a brain which you seem to be lacking . Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. You do have right to grow another arm if your genetics and mutation allows it. It says so right in the 2nd amendment.

How is that for a straight forward reading of the Amendment where I am not reading anything in and am taking it at face value. Now it makes sense, doesn't it. You are right. When we read it verbatum, we don't need to clarify it at all. It's crystal clear.

" Nowhere does it say you have the right to bear firearms. Just Arms. "

You're a Prog dumb fuck.

Hey, I am not the one that wanted to use it in the literal sense. But since you rightwinggunnutters want to, let's do it. Now, tell me again that the 2nd amendment doesn't need updated. When you use it in the literal sense as you people have been hammering us to do, all of a sudden it has an entirely different meaning.

You're an idiot.
I have a gun in each hand, watchu gon do???

Then you are breaking the literal law if you are just using the 2nd amendment in it's literal writing. IF you are complying with your State Laws, I would do nothing. IF you are outside of those laws, double tap.

 

[Daryl Hunt]

We keep the 1934 Firearms Act.

We combine the 1934 Firearms Act with Heller V. D.C. and the 1998 Firearms Act. We also add in ALL gun sales require background checks because those may cross state lines.

Why? If I can pass a background check to own a firearm, why should it matter what firearm I own?

Outside of extraordinary arms, that's up to the state, not the Feds. But I do support background checks. Things may change in your life that may change your ability to purchase firearms.

 

[Rustic]

We keep the 1934 Firearms Act.

We combine the 1934 Firearms Act with Heller V. D.C. and the 1998 Firearms Act. We also add in ALL gun sales require background checks because those may cross state lines.

Why? If I can pass a background check to own a firearm, why should it matter what firearm I own?

Outside of extraordinary arms, that's up to the state, not the Feds. But I do support background checks. Things may change in your life that may change your ability to purchase firearms.

 

[satrebil]

We keep the 1934 Firearms Act.

We combine the 1934 Firearms Act with Heller V. D.C. and the 1998 Firearms Act. We also add in ALL gun sales require background checks because those may cross state lines.

Why? If I can pass a background check to own a firearm, why should it matter what firearm I own?

Outside of extraordinary arms, that's up to the state, not the Feds. But I do support background checks. Things may change in your life that may change your ability to purchase firearms.

Define "extraordinary".

 

[Daryl Hunt]

We keep the 1934 Firearms Act.

We combine the 1934 Firearms Act with Heller V. D.C. and the 1998 Firearms Act. We also add in ALL gun sales require background checks because those may cross state lines.

Why? If I can pass a background check to own a firearm, why should it matter what firearm I own?

Outside of extraordinary arms, that's up to the state, not the Feds. But I do support background checks. Things may change in your life that may change your ability to purchase firearms.

Define "extraordinary".

Full Auto, Machine Guns, Cannons, Grenades, explosive devices, bombs, missiles, and bigger. That should be self explanatory.