Gun control and firearms ban

[justinacolmena]

The federal government (actually all levels of government ) has a duty to uphold the the law... If you find a law unconstitutional then sue the Government in court, if you loose then you want to break the law after it was deemed constitutional...

So you are givng the courts absolute power to withhold and deny our constitutional rights from us.

You actually want to kill police officers because you don't like a particular constitutional law (as deemed by the courts)...

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

>>> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.​

>>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<<​

How would that make you different from any other criminal?

People are so fucking law-abiding they don’t even know how many violent felonies they commit each and every day of their waking lives.

 

[CowboyTed]

...Hey, genius...you have no room to talk... The Europeans banned and confiscated guns after WW1.....then the German socialists murdered 12 million unarmed Europeans... Excuse us if we don't take your dumb opinions seriously....

The Nazis were 'socialists' in name only... in truth, they were hyper-right-wing ultra-nationalists operating under false colors.

First can I say one thing... NAZIs didn't ban guns, they actually loosened the gun laws in Germany.

No, gun control regulation in Nazi Germany did not help advance the Holocaust

On March 13, 2018, gun control activists laid 7,000 pairs of shoes on the lawn outside the Capitol in D.C. to represent

www.politifact.com

https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=4029&context=flr

Nazi gun control argument - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

NAZIs were also not socialists... They were Nationalists and far right wing... I know this is hard for some here but saying NAZIs are socialists at this stage is just showing us how ignorant of history you are and pretty much nothing else. Every point after that has a prefix that you don't know what you are talking about. You are like a boy who eats worms giving a nutrition class...

 

[CowboyTed]

The federal government (actually all levels of government ) has a duty to uphold the the law... If you find a law unconstitutional then sue the Government in court, if you loose then you want to break the law after it was deemed constitutional...

So you are givng the courts absolute power to withhold and deny our constitutional rights from us.

You actually want to kill police officers because you don't like a particular constitutional law (as deemed by the courts)...

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

>>> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.​

>>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<<​

How would that make you different from any other criminal?

People are so fucking law-abiding they don’t even know how many violent felonies they commit each and every day of their waking lives.

Who is tasked to interpret laws (here is a tip the US Message Board is not it)?
It is the courts, courts read the law and says what is acceptable... Don't like it , find a new country (unfortunately this is how it works in most countries, well all the nice ones)..

So if you start shooting at the cops for your interpretation of the law, they will return fire... Wouldn't want it to be a surprise to you.

 

[justinacolmena]

It is the courts, courts read the law and says what is acceptable...

So you’re claiming a total Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat through the court system, and letting all the judicial and executive officers off from their oath to support the Constitution because the judges say it’s okay to enforce unconstitutional laws?

 

[Dr Grump]

The truth is that leftists DO want to take our guns and anyone who believes otherwise is gullible.

Not true. They want certain types of guns off the agenda.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The federal government (actually all levels of government ) has a duty to uphold the the law... If you find a law unconstitutional then sue the Government in court, if you loose then you want to break the law after it was deemed constitutional...

So you are givng the courts absolute power to withhold and deny our constitutional rights from us.

You actually want to kill police officers because you don't like a particular constitutional law (as deemed by the courts)...

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

>>> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.​

>>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<<​

How would that make you different from any other criminal?

People are so fucking law-abiding they don’t even know how many violent felonies they commit each and every day of their waking lives.

Who is tasked to interpret laws (here is a tip the US Message Board is not it)?
It is the courts, courts read the law and says what is acceptable... Don't like it , find a new country (unfortunately this is how it works in most countries, well all the nice ones)..

So if you start shooting at the cops for your interpretation of the law, they will return fire... Wouldn't want it to be a surprise to you.

What if the courts have not yet ruled on the Constitutionality of a gun confiscation law when they come to get my weapons?

 

[K9Buck]

Not true. They want certain types of guns off the agenda.

Yea? So why is it that citizens can't get conceal-carry permits in leftist jurisdictions such as NY, LA, Chicago, etc.?

 

[justinacolmena]

Not true. They want certain types of guns off the agenda.

Not only that, but the fascists and Bolsheviks want certain types of prohibited persons like me -- that is, human beings, off the agenda.

Identify Prohibited Persons | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

The Gun Control Act (GCA), codified at 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), makes it unlawful for certain categories of persons to ship, transport, receive, or possess firearms or ammunition, to include any person: convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; who is...

www.atf.gov

NICS Specialist Prevents Sale of Firearms to Prohibited Person | Federal Bureau of Investigation

A National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) liaison specialist working the NICS E-Check transfer process was instrumental in preventing a prohibited person from obtaining three firearms.

www.fbi.gov

Lists of Parties of Concern

Denied Persons List

Code of Federal Regulations - TD ATF-391

 

[justinacolmena]

What if the courts have not yet ruled on the Constitutionality of a gun confiscation law when they come to get my weapons?

If the courts rule they can take your guns away, then they’ll take your guns away.
If the courts don’t rule they can’t take your guns awy, then they’ll take your guns away.
If the courts rule they can’t take your guns away, then they’ll take your guns away with a memorandum of understanding with the federal law enforcement community.
If the courts don’t rule they can take your guns away, then they’ll take your guns away anyway.

What else did you think?
They’re just going to let you keep your guns?
No. You’re out of your mind, an armed and dangerous psychotic mentally disturbed individual suffering from delusions of paranoia and wild government conspiracy theories.

 

[CowboyTed]

It is the courts, courts read the law and says what is acceptable...

So you’re claiming a total Marxist dictatorship of the proletariat through the court system, and letting all the judicial and executive officers off from their oath to support the Constitution because the judges say it’s okay to enforce unconstitutional laws?

First of all, there was a vote and law makers were put in place by the will of the people.

Then there is the supreme court, laws passed are subject to review by the Supreme Court, they are the people who say if a law is constitutional or not. They are the ultimate decision makers on what is constitutional or not.

That what decides if something is constitutional or not. Not everyone gets there own version of what is constitutional.

This is basic civics.

 

[justinacolmena]

ultimate decision makers

basic civics.

So the Constitution says we can have guns but the courts say we cannot.
You, sir, are the one out of your mind.

 

[CowboyTed]

The federal government (actually all levels of government ) has a duty to uphold the the law... If you find a law unconstitutional then sue the Government in court, if you loose then you want to break the law after it was deemed constitutional...

So you are givng the courts absolute power to withhold and deny our constitutional rights from us.

You actually want to kill police officers because you don't like a particular constitutional law (as deemed by the courts)...

Full Text of the U.S. Constitution | Constitution Center

Read and share the complete text of the United States Constitution.

constitutioncenter.org

>>> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.​

>>> The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.<<<​

How would that make you different from any other criminal?

People are so fucking law-abiding they don’t even know how many violent felonies they commit each and every day of their waking lives.

Who is tasked to interpret laws (here is a tip the US Message Board is not it)?
It is the courts, courts read the law and says what is acceptable... Don't like it , find a new country (unfortunately this is how it works in most countries, well all the nice ones)..

So if you start shooting at the cops for your interpretation of the law, they will return fire... Wouldn't want it to be a surprise to you.

What if the courts have not yet ruled on the Constitutionality of a gun confiscation law when they come to get my weapons?

Fair Question.
You as an individual (or member of a Group e.g. NRA) you can contest it in lower courts and appeal it to higher courts... Yes the elected Government could take your guns temporarily but it would be very hard to implement an unconstitutional law, law enforcement alone would object before it was heard.
It still doesn't give anyone the right to start shooting at cops. Courts can be quick in putting stays on unconstitutional laws until they are heard by the proper courts. No Government is going to be able to do a mass gun confiscation under an unconstitutional law.

 

[CowboyTed]

ultimate decision makers

basic civics.

So the Constitution says we can have guns but the courts say we cannot.
You, sir, are the one out of your mind.

If the Supreme Court interpret that way then that is the way it is... They are the ones who are selected to read the constitution.
I didn't invent this.
This is basic civics.

 

[justinacolmena]

You as an individual (or member of a Group e.g. NRA) you can contest it in lower courts and appeal it to higher courts...

That is not true, and therefore a lie, because if the courts aren't letting Trump’s re-election against Biden stand, then they sure as hell have no intention of letting us keep our guns.

 

[justinacolmena]

If the Supreme Court interpret that way then that is the way it is...

Just kneel, worship, and obey the nine Gods of the Supreme Court who have been selected and appointed from eternity to rule over us with such absolute power.

 

[CowboyTed]

You as an individual (or member of a Group e.g. NRA) you can contest it in lower courts and appeal it to higher courts...

That is not true, and therefore a lie, because if the courts aren't letting Trump’s re-election against Biden stand, then they sure as hell have no intention of letting us keep our guns.

Trump failed to produce any evidence to show that the election result wouldn't stand.

Trump's legal team even admitted it in court...

In Court, Trump's Lawyers Aren't Claiming 'Massive' Fraud

While the President and his lawyers make histrionic claims in public, the campaign's legal filings are narrow in scope

time.com

 

[justinacolmena]

Trump failed to produce any evidence to show that the election result wouldn't stand.

The proper result, namely being that of a victory for Trump.

 

[CowboyTed]

If the Supreme Court interpret that way then that is the way it is...

Just kneel, worship, and obey the nine Gods of the Supreme Court who have been selected and appointed from eternity to rule over us with such absolute power.

When it comes to the constitution that is pretty much how it goes... That is why there is fights over justices...

Other countries have far larger constitutions so judges have far less wiggle room. US one is very light compared to other more modern ones... Also US constitution is considered dead compare to 'living constitution' of other countries...
Example: Ireland has had 19 constitutional amendments since 1990. Last time US changed the constitution was in 1972.

Again this is all basic civics... This is not opinion.

 

[justinacolmena]

When it comes to the constitution that is pretty much how it goes...

No. It's not pretty, and it’s not going that way anymore.

That is why there is fights over justices...

They’re judges, not justices.

Bible Gateway passage: Luke 19:4-5 - King James Version

And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that way. And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house.

www.biblegateway.com

 

[CowboyTed]

Trump failed to produce any evidence to show that the election result wouldn't stand.

The proper result, namely being that of a victory for Trump.

I don't think you get how the judicial system works...

Courts don't throw out whole elections if there was a small error with no intention. By the way Trump's legal team struggled to find evidence for that.

You need to produce real evidence of mass fraud in this case to question the result. This simply wasn't produced, his own lawyers admitted that in court.