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.
you do realize due process deals with the judicial system it has nothing to do with the creation of laws.and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendmentEach state has its own gun lawsFirearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state lawsidiot all citizens in the U.S. have the same rights
due process is when someone commits a crime not when law makers create a law
Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.
This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law
Unless they meet the due process requirement. Once again, you left that part out. Tell you what. I am going to make some demands to USMB. See if you agree with them. Since you like to only use part of the Constitution, I get to do the same thing. Here are my demands.
I only want to see post by people that only agree with me so we need to modify the 1st amendment. So you will have all your posts deleted and you will be banned for life
We are going to modify the 4th amendment to read that if you post one single post (just before you are banned for life) the Government shall seize your computer after ransacking your home without notice.
We are going to charge you with a crime (We'll make something up) and hold you in jail forever without allowing you to go to trial, have legal representation. In affect, make you dissappear. Yes, let's modify the 6th amendment for you rtwingnutjobs only.
While we are at it, just for you rtwingnutjobs, you can't get a jury under the 7th amendment but that's not a problem with the modified 6th amendment.
Let's throw out the 8th in your case while we are at it. No bail at all. And Hogs will live better than you.
Now, I demand these things or I am going to throw myself to the ground in a fit of rage. (and probably miss)
Careful, Ladies, The 19th may be next (ducking)
you really suck at reading comprehension what in the hell do you think inalienable rights are? self-defense is an inalienable right which means the right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable right.Wrong.Dumbass look at the 14th amendment sectin oneFirearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state lawsThe 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
without due process of law
From the Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.
Firearms fall can fall under Public Safety and therefore can fall under the due process clause of both the 5th and 14th ammendment.
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law
Who's supreme law of the land? If you go by the Constitution, if due process is used by the state then firearm regulations ARE legal and they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The one law that may have trouble passing the muster would be the 1934 Firearms Act because the Federals are not exempt according to the 5th amendment. But that was corrected with the 14th ammendment so that means that the 1934 Firearms Act is legal. As long as due process is used it will stand up in court because that's right out of the Constitution of the United States. If you don't like it, get it changed. Many have tried, few have succeeded.
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This means no state can create a law that would deprive citizens of that state that other citizens in other states have that are protected by the U.S. Constitution
It kills your due process bullshit argument time to move your goal post
See the Slaughter-House Cases (1873) with regard to the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment.
In essence, the 14th Amendment codifies the doctrine of inalienable rights, where the protected liberties of citizens who reside in the states cannot be violated by state government – even if a law enacted by the state reflects the will of the majority of the people.
The courts decide when a state has acted contrary to the 14th Amendment and violated the rights of citizens residing in that state.
And the courts have determined that states which have enacted UBCs have governed in accordance with the 14th Amendment.
just like the citizens of North Carolina voted for amendment 2 the sex you were born with is the bathroom you use it was struck down as unconstitutional therefore you argument is mootAnd UBCs are no such law – they do not violate the rights of residents in states with UCBs; that other states may not have laws authorizing UCBs is irrelevant.no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens haveThe 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.
the 14th amendment says a state cannot create a law that would deprive citizens of that state their that is shared with other citizens in other states haveAlso wrong.and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendmentEach state has its own gun lawsFirearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state lawsEncyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.
This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law
This is your subjective opinion, not a fact of law.
Only the courts have the authority to determine when a state measure violates the Constitution.
And save the inane sophistry that the courts ‘sometimes get it wrong.’
So your wrong
and gun laws that deprive the rights of citizens from the same rights other U.S. Citizens have would also be unconstitutionaljust like the citizens of North Carolina voted for amendment 2 the sex you were born with is the bathroom you use it was struck down as unconstitutional therefore you argument is mootAnd UBCs are no such law – they do not violate the rights of residents in states with UCBs; that other states may not have laws authorizing UCBs is irrelevant.no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens haveThe 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
You keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.
It was struck down because it was against the constitution. While I disagree with the ruling I accept it because I accept ALL of the Constitution.
you're fucking nutsthe 14th amendment says a state cannot create a law that would deprive citizens of that state their that is shared with other citizens in other states haveAlso wrong.and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendmentEach state has its own gun lawsFirearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state laws
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law
This is your subjective opinion, not a fact of law.
Only the courts have the authority to determine when a state measure violates the Constitution.
And save the inane sophistry that the courts ‘sometimes get it wrong.’
So your wrong
Exactly where in
The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
does it say that. Now, not only are you leaving out parts, you are adding in parts.
you do realize due process deals with the judicial system it has nothing to do with the creation of laws.and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendmentEach state has its own gun lawsFirearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state lawsEncyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.
This can be done in one of three way. At the Voting Booths, the Legislature, and the Courts. And it applies to everyone not excluding criminals. If you look at what is going around you, you will see hundreds if not thousands of "Due Process" examples in your life.
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law
Unless they meet the due process requirement. Once again, you left that part out. Tell you what. I am going to make some demands to USMB. See if you agree with them. Since you like to only use part of the Constitution, I get to do the same thing. Here are my demands.
I only want to see post by people that only agree with me so we need to modify the 1st amendment. So you will have all your posts deleted and you will be banned for life
We are going to modify the 4th amendment to read that if you post one single post (just before you are banned for life) the Government shall seize your computer after ransacking your home without notice.
We are going to charge you with a crime (We'll make something up) and hold you in jail forever without allowing you to go to trial, have legal representation. In affect, make you dissappear. Yes, let's modify the 6th amendment for you rtwingnutjobs only.
While we are at it, just for you rtwingnutjobs, you can't get a jury under the 7th amendment but that's not a problem with the modified 6th amendment.
Let's throw out the 8th in your case while we are at it. No bail at all. And Hogs will live better than you.
Now, I demand these things or I am going to throw myself to the ground in a fit of rage. (and probably miss)
Careful, Ladies, The 19th may be next (ducking)
the 14th amendment was created to protect blacks from laws created by democrats that deprive them of rights other citizens have that are protected by the federal government.
you're fucking nutsthe 14th amendment says a state cannot create a law that would deprive citizens of that state their that is shared with other citizens in other states haveAlso wrong.and they are unconstitutional so says the 14th amendmentEach state has its own gun laws
This is your subjective opinion, not a fact of law.
Only the courts have the authority to determine when a state measure violates the Constitution.
And save the inane sophistry that the courts ‘sometimes get it wrong.’
So your wrong
Exactly where in
The 14th amendment section 1 ........No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
does it say that. Now, not only are you leaving out parts, you are adding in parts.
the 14th amendment section 1 I left out the bold to show the key point
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
and gun laws that deprive the rights of citizens from the same rights other U.S. Citizens have would also be unconstitutionaljust like the citizens of North Carolina voted for amendment 2 the sex you were born with is the bathroom you use it was struck down as unconstitutional therefore you argument is mootAnd UBCs are no such law – they do not violate the rights of residents in states with UCBs; that other states may not have laws authorizing UCBs is irrelevant.no law can be created that would deprive the rights of a citizen that other citizens haveYou keep repeating the law but you keep not reading "without due process of law" over and over. This is why the Federal Courts have no choice but to rule in favor of many of the gun regs for the States, Counties and Cities. The Supreme Court doesn't make laws, they make their ruling according to the Constitution. All of the Constitution not just the parts that agree with you.
It was struck down because it was against the constitution. While I disagree with the ruling I accept it because I accept ALL of the Constitution.
you really suck at reading comprehension what in the hell do you think inalienable rights are? self-defense is an inalienable right which means the right to keep and bear arms is an inalienable right.Wrong.Dumbass look at the 14th amendment sectin oneFirearms fall under the protection of the U.S. Constitution supreme law of the land supersedes state lawswithout due process of law
From the Encyclopedia Britannica
The meaning of due process as it relates to substantive enactments and procedural legislation has evolved over decades of controversial interpretation by the Supreme Court. Today, if a law may reasonably be deemed to promote the public welfare and the means selected bear a reasonable relationship to the legitimate public interest, then the law has met the due process standard. If the law seeks to regulate a fundamental right, such as the right to travel or the right to vote, then this enactment must meet a stricter judicial scrutiny, known as the compelling interest test. Economic legislation is generally upheld if the state can point to any conceivable public benefit resulting from its enactment.
Firearms fall can fall under Public Safety and therefore can fall under the due process clause of both the 5th and 14th ammendment.
Citizens of one state have the same rights as citizens of any state equal protection of the law
Who's supreme law of the land? If you go by the Constitution, if due process is used by the state then firearm regulations ARE legal and they have been upheld by the Supreme Court. The one law that may have trouble passing the muster would be the 1934 Firearms Act because the Federals are not exempt according to the 5th amendment. But that was corrected with the 14th ammendment so that means that the 1934 Firearms Act is legal. As long as due process is used it will stand up in court because that's right out of the Constitution of the United States. If you don't like it, get it changed. Many have tried, few have succeeded.
No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
This means no state can create a law that would deprive citizens of that state that other citizens in other states have that are protected by the U.S. Constitution
It kills your due process bullshit argument time to move your goal post
See the Slaughter-House Cases (1873) with regard to the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment.
In essence, the 14th Amendment codifies the doctrine of inalienable rights, where the protected liberties of citizens who reside in the states cannot be violated by state government – even if a law enacted by the state reflects the will of the majority of the people.
The courts decide when a state has acted contrary to the 14th Amendment and violated the rights of citizens residing in that state.
And the courts have determined that states which have enacted UBCs have governed in accordance with the 14th Amendment.
"First came the panic buying of hand sanitizer. Then, people panic bought toilet paper. Now, food shelves are emptying and firearm and ammunition sales are through the roof. The COVID19 outbreak might be bad for the stock market, but it’s certainly been a boon for very specific sectors of the economy. The gun industry, used to such boom/bust cycles, knows how to respond – but other sectors might not be so acclimated.
Here at Omaha Outdoors, we’ve been inundated with inquiries from out-of-state folks – many from California – asking if we can ship them a gun directly. The answer is, of course, no. Despite what politicians and many in popular media claim, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house. Well, you could, if you were a federally licensed firearm dealer (or federally licensed curio and relic collector) and your home was your place of business. Other than that, no, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped, especially across state lines, to your home."
A Lot of People Are Finding Out You Can’t Just Buy a Gun Online - Omaha Outdoors
---------------------
I never tire of proving these anti-gun idiots wrong.
I am guessing the NRA is using the coronavirus ans a marketing opportunity. There is no problems that guns cannot solve."First came the panic buying of hand sanitizer. Then, people panic bought toilet paper. Now, food shelves are emptying and firearm and ammunition sales are through the roof. The COVID19 outbreak might be bad for the stock market, but it’s certainly been a boon for very specific sectors of the economy. The gun industry, used to such boom/bust cycles, knows how to respond – but other sectors might not be so acclimated.
Here at Omaha Outdoors, we’ve been inundated with inquiries from out-of-state folks – many from California – asking if we can ship them a gun directly. The answer is, of course, no. Despite what politicians and many in popular media claim, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house. Well, you could, if you were a federally licensed firearm dealer (or federally licensed curio and relic collector) and your home was your place of business. Other than that, no, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped, especially across state lines, to your home."
A Lot of People Are Finding Out You Can’t Just Buy a Gun Online - Omaha Outdoors
---------------------
I never tire of proving these anti-gun idiots wrong.
How effective are my guns against COVID-19? Having been in biomedical research for over a quarter of a century, including a stint in an infectious diseases division of a top tier US pharma company I musty admit, I had not considered that.
Oh that's not fear of a retroviral pandemic. That is fear of other Americans and the state of American society itself.I am guessing the NRA is using the coronavirus ans a marketing opportunity. There is no problems that guns cannot solve."First came the panic buying of hand sanitizer. Then, people panic bought toilet paper. Now, food shelves are emptying and firearm and ammunition sales are through the roof. The COVID19 outbreak might be bad for the stock market, but it’s certainly been a boon for very specific sectors of the economy. The gun industry, used to such boom/bust cycles, knows how to respond – but other sectors might not be so acclimated.
Here at Omaha Outdoors, we’ve been inundated with inquiries from out-of-state folks – many from California – asking if we can ship them a gun directly. The answer is, of course, no. Despite what politicians and many in popular media claim, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house. Well, you could, if you were a federally licensed firearm dealer (or federally licensed curio and relic collector) and your home was your place of business. Other than that, no, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped, especially across state lines, to your home."
A Lot of People Are Finding Out You Can’t Just Buy a Gun Online - Omaha Outdoors
---------------------
I never tire of proving these anti-gun idiots wrong.
How effective are my guns against COVID-19? Having been in biomedical research for over a quarter of a century, including a stint in an infectious diseases division of a top tier US pharma company I musty admit, I had not considered that.
Some people rely too heavily on guns for safety. They feel guns will protect them from everything. It can be a false sense of security, putting them at risk. Guns can provide some protections, but there use should not be overstated.Oh that's not fear of a retroviral pandemic. That is fear of other Americans and the state of American society itself.I am guessing the NRA is using the coronavirus ans a marketing opportunity. There is no problems that guns cannot solve."First came the panic buying of hand sanitizer. Then, people panic bought toilet paper. Now, food shelves are emptying and firearm and ammunition sales are through the roof. The COVID19 outbreak might be bad for the stock market, but it’s certainly been a boon for very specific sectors of the economy. The gun industry, used to such boom/bust cycles, knows how to respond – but other sectors might not be so acclimated.
Here at Omaha Outdoors, we’ve been inundated with inquiries from out-of-state folks – many from California – asking if we can ship them a gun directly. The answer is, of course, no. Despite what politicians and many in popular media claim, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped to your house. Well, you could, if you were a federally licensed firearm dealer (or federally licensed curio and relic collector) and your home was your place of business. Other than that, no, you can’t buy a gun online and have it shipped, especially across state lines, to your home."
A Lot of People Are Finding Out You Can’t Just Buy a Gun Online - Omaha Outdoors
---------------------
I never tire of proving these anti-gun idiots wrong.
How effective are my guns against COVID-19? Having been in biomedical research for over a quarter of a century, including a stint in an infectious diseases division of a top tier US pharma company I musty admit, I had not considered that.
People are buying guns because they know we’re only one more disaster from total government system failure. If that happens, people will have to defend themselves. We all know that certain “groups” will go crazy and start home invasions and random violent attacks in that scenario.Why? Are they going to shoot the virus? Or was everyone rushing to make their planned purchases before the store got closed by state order?When I stopped at the outdoor sports and supply store this weekend, ammo was being cleared out and a huge line to buy guns. All I could do was laugh.
You are fully aware of the fact you statement is a lie.UCBs are perfectly Constitutional, effective, and in no manner violate the Second Amendment.
This is a lie.Firearms can be purchased online absent a 4473 and a NICS background check.
This is also a lie.UBCs are a warranted, effective, and Constitutional countermeasure to this problem.
This is either a lie, or a statement of abject ignorance.So but the assault weapon ban of the 90'sc reduced mass shootings.
