Example of why you can never trust Liberals with your Consitutional rights

Flash

Diamond Member
Dec 8, 2014
71,172
62,058
The filthy SAFE Act in New York was touted as 'common sense gun regulation". However, we can never trust Liberals with our Constitutional Rights because they will always abuse them. They have no idea what "shall not be infringed" means.

There have been several examples of how oppressive it has been. Everything from the veteran arrested for having an unloaded standard capacity magazine in his car trunk to the guy having his firearms confiscated for seeing a doctor about a mild case of insomnia to the tourist arrested for the mere possession of a firearm.

Here is the latest.


Deputies confiscate a CNY veteran's guns. They were wrong. What happened?

Deputies confiscate a CNY veteran's guns. They were wrong. What happened?

TABERG, NY - Don Hall was sitting in his living room watching TV with his girlfriend about 9:30 p.m. earlier this year when he was startled by flashing police car lights in his driveway.

Hall met the Oneida County sheriff's deputies in the driveway, worried that they were bringing bad news about a family member.

Instead, the deputies produced an official document demanding that Hall, a 70-year-old Vietnam veteran who is a retired pipefitter, turn over his guns to them on the spot. On the document Hall said he was described as "mentally defective."

When Hall told police he'd never had any mental issues, Hall said, deputies told him he must have done something that triggered the order under the New York state's SAFE Act.

The deputies left that night with six guns - two handguns and four long guns.

"I was guilty until I could prove myself innocent," Hall said. "They don't tell you why or what you supposedly did. It was just a bad screw-up."

Under what legal authority Hall's guns were confiscated is in disagreement.

Hall and his lawyer said they are convinced his guns were taken as a result of a report under the NY SAFE Act. The New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act was adopted in 2013 after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newton, Conn.





 
The filthy SAFE Act in New York was touted as 'common sense gun regulation". However, we can never trust Liberals with our Constitutional Rights because they will always abuse them. They have no idea what "shall not be infringed" means.

There have been several examples of how oppressive it has been. Everything from the veteran arrested for having an unloaded standard capacity magazine in his car trunk to the guy having his firearms confiscated for seeing a doctor about a mild case of insomnia to the tourist arrested for the mere possession of a firearm.

Here is the latest.


Deputies confiscate a CNY veteran's guns. They were wrong. What happened?

Deputies confiscate a CNY veteran's guns. They were wrong. What happened?

TABERG, NY - Don Hall was sitting in his living room watching TV with his girlfriend about 9:30 p.m. earlier this year when he was startled by flashing police car lights in his driveway.

Hall met the Oneida County sheriff's deputies in the driveway, worried that they were bringing bad news about a family member.

Instead, the deputies produced an official document demanding that Hall, a 70-year-old Vietnam veteran who is a retired pipefitter, turn over his guns to them on the spot. On the document Hall said he was described as "mentally defective."

When Hall told police he'd never had any mental issues, Hall said, deputies told him he must have done something that triggered the order under the New York state's SAFE Act.

The deputies left that night with six guns - two handguns and four long guns.

"I was guilty until I could prove myself innocent," Hall said. "They don't tell you why or what you supposedly did. It was just a bad screw-up."

Under what legal authority Hall's guns were confiscated is in disagreement.

Hall and his lawyer said they are convinced his guns were taken as a result of a report under the NY SAFE Act. The New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act was adopted in 2013 after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in Newton, Conn.





Ahh, the old guilty until proven innocent. Congratulations New York you are now officially Canada.
 
You would think that the right to keep and bear arms, being a Constitutionally protected right, would have a fairly high level of proof needed in order to have confiscation. Not in Liberal commie New York.

The guy got his firearms back after it cost him a lot in lawyer's fees.

The filthy government wouldn't even admit they were wrong.

Don't ever trust Liberals with your rights. They will screw you.
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.


...and when Blacks attacks Whites like they do every day the Liberals have no concerns for the rights of the victims, do they?
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.



I guess you can't distinguish the difference between the State using police to violate the due process and takings clauses and individual police actions.


.
 
I will never trust a conservative with my rights or to lead the nation or to keep America safe.
 
I will never trust a conservative with my rights or to lead the nation or to keep America safe.


A Liberal doesn't want this country to be safe. They just want what they call "social justice", which is commie speak for greed.
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.


...and when Blacks attacks Whites like they do every day the Liberals have no concerns for the rights of the victims, do they?

Why wouldn't they?
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.
Nonsense! What a dishonest remark! In 98 percent of those the guy was resisting or behaving in a manner that made the cops fear for their safety. Perhaps if they complied.....
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.
Nonsense! What a dishonest remark!

The comments from conservatives in this other thread prove my point

Police kill wrong man at wrong house
 
I saw the thread title and immediately thought about the way the libtardz deny CONSTITUTIONAL rights to. . .

Blank.
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.
Nonsense! What a dishonest remark!

The comments from conservatives in this other thread prove my point

Police kill wrong man at wrong house
Listen, with all due respect, if you aren't there you can't really say what happened, or why. Many different things come into play here. I have ALWAYS been critical of police at times when things like that happen. Did the guy point a gun at the police? If he did, he should have shot. But apparently the guy was also a convicted felon and they can't own guns. Sure it's a bad thing but in that one situation you can't fault the police for shooting back. If he had not had a gun and complied, even though the police were wrong on being there he would have been alive. You can't win that battle sometimes, and unless you are ready to die, give up.
 
The Right had BEST learn to speak up, speak up loudly, speak up often and defend the right to be vocal about protecting rights.....or they will be lost. PERIOD.

Did you know Hillary Clinton went to the United Nations and accepted and supported a resolution that would have made it illegal for a US citizen to violate Muslim principles?
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.
Nonsense! What a dishonest remark!

The comments from conservatives in this other thread prove my point

Police kill wrong man at wrong house


Why are you deflecting from the constitutional issues in the OP?


.
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.
Nonsense! What a dishonest remark!

The comments from conservatives in this other thread prove my point

Police kill wrong man at wrong house


You are confused.

There is no law allowing the police to attack an innocent person.

However, in commie New York the SAFE Act allows the police to confiscate firearms without due process just because somebody say you might be threat. .

Are you so dense as to not understand the difference?
 
But on the flip side, when cops are seen on video beating the shit out of or shooting an unarmed black man conservatives can't wait to side with the police and assume the perp is guilty until proven innocent.

Conservatives' applications of our Constitutional rights are quite selective.
I don't see that the majority will wait until the facts come out but do give the Officers the benefit of the doubt, they put their lives on the line everyday and deserve support.

The narrative from the left is almost always racist cop. If the Cop is obviously guilty then they should pay as a normal citizen would. If they get away with a crime then I'll protest along side of lefties. Minus the rioting, looting and burning shit to the ground.
 

Forum List

Back
Top