Massachusetts: This Is The Nation’s Toughest Gun Law

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The People, refers to the Whole, not the Part.

How manyt times am I going to bave to shoot this down before you give up on this bullshit collectivist argument?

 

[Skull Pilot]

there is literally, no appeal to ignorance of the law in our Republic.

That literally makes no sense. What do you mean?

Laws are made of words; those words have meaning. The meaning of those those words is clear. Well regulated militia of the whole People, are Necessary and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

The second amendment is not a law

There are now laws contained within the Bill of Rights

Our Second Amendment is not a Constitution unto itself; thus, your right wing propaganda is simply rhetoric.

I never said it was, Dipshit.

I said it was not a law. The Bill of rights does not contain any laws

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

that which is declared Necessary to the security of a free State shall not be Infringed

Then it would say simply:

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.

In fact, it would look like someone copied and pasted the right of the people to keep and bear Arms in the wrong place and forgot about it having not proofread the sentence. Your argument, unfortunately, falls apart given that there was no "copy and paste" when this was written, you clown!

the people are the militia. now, do you understand?

Yes. OUR militia is well regulated( Militia=non felon gun owners who went through proper channels). The enemy is not. They run wild with impunity and the meatheads in blue are far too small in number and busy with important things like collecting revenues to defend anything other than their right to overtime while abusing the average citizen trying to go about his or her day.
"I'll need to cite you. No seat belt, turn signal out,loud mufflers,beads hanging from mirror $700". Meanwhile 2 houses are being burglarized and nobody is responding to the alarm and an old guy just got hit in the head and his wallet jacked 2 blocks away. But that doesn't allow for raises now does it ?
ONO. They arent patrolling over in the "dual citizen" encampment due to they themselves being sued-written up for " racial profiling"

you must be a republican; all i hear is excuses. We have a Second Amendment and should have, no security problems.

NOOP. I'm a constitutional-ist. The repugnicant party are pieces of fucking shit like Cheney. Bushz. RayGun and other riff raff hiding behind Bibles, Flags, cowboy hats and other nonsense appealing to uneducated rednecks who continue to worship these idiots against their own best interests.I'm certainly NOT a democrat either.
I'm a guy that believes that all tax revenues go to benefit of the residents of the country FIRST. Then you can dole out whatever to trash like NK and IsNtReal and aids infested nigga nations if some whore vote seeker lives in a community full of their relatives. I also feel state by state law should ALWAYS rule over national oversight.
Due to the great satans financial situation; foreign aid should be 0.0.Leave them on their own NOT US.

lol

You’re not a very good ‘constitutionalist’ if you don’t even know what the Supremacy Clause is.

 

[Lakhota]

Then it would say simply:

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.

In fact, it would look like someone copied and pasted the right of the people to keep and bear Arms in the wrong place and forgot about it having not proofread the sentence. Your argument, unfortunately, falls apart given that there was no "copy and paste" when this was written, you clown!

the people are the militia. now, do you understand?

Yes. OUR militia is well regulated( Militia=non felon gun owners who went through proper channels). The enemy is not. They run wild with impunity and the meatheads in blue are far too small in number and busy with important things like collecting revenues to defend anything other than their right to overtime while abusing the average citizen trying to go about his or her day.
"I'll need to cite you. No seat belt, turn signal out,loud mufflers,beads hanging from mirror $700". Meanwhile 2 houses are being burglarized and nobody is responding to the alarm and an old guy just got hit in the head and his wallet jacked 2 blocks away. But that doesn't allow for raises now does it ?
ONO. They arent patrolling over in the "dual citizen" encampment due to they themselves being sued-written up for " racial profiling"

you must be a republican; all i hear is excuses. We have a Second Amendment and should have, no security problems.

NOOP. I'm a constitutional-ist. The repugnicant party are pieces of fucking shit like Cheney. Bushz. RayGun and other riff raff hiding behind Bibles, Flags, cowboy hats and other nonsense appealing to uneducated rednecks who continue to worship these idiots against their own best interests.I'm certainly NOT a democrat either.
I'm a guy that believes that all tax revenues go to benefit of the residents of the country FIRST. Then you can dole out whatever to trash like NK and IsNtReal and aids infested nigga nations if some whore vote seeker lives in a community full of their relatives. I also feel state by state law should ALWAYS rule over national oversight.
Due to the great satans financial situation; foreign aid should be 0.0.Leave them on their own NOT US.

lol

You’re not a very good ‘constitutionalist’ if you don’t even know what the Supremacy Clause is.

I agree!

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

No, it doesn't. It says, well regulated militia are Necessary and shall not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union.

Conveniently skips over the most important part.

 

[Lakhota]

The 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fossil. About as meaningful today as trilobites.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fossil. About as meaningful today as trilobites.

So is the 1st.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The People, refers to the Whole, not the Part.

How manyt times am I going to bave to shoot this down before you give up on this bullshit collectivist argument?

Arguing with danielpalos is like competing in the Special Olympics—even when you win, you're still a retard, just for letting him draw you into a long senseless argument that does nothing but disrupt the thread in which it happens.

 

[Pop23]

The 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fossil. About as meaningful today as trilobites.

Like reservations

 

[bgrouse]

The People, refers to the Whole, not the Part.

How manyt times am I going to bave to shoot this down before you give up on this bullshit collectivist argument?

If the People refers to the Whole, then the Whole People have the Right to Bear Arms. Not just the regulated ones.

 

[bgrouse]

The 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fossil. About as meaningful today as trilobites.

This is actually a relatively good liberal argument. It's still weak, but much better than his moronic brethren who butcher the English language to make try (and fail) to make a point.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fossil. About as meaningful today as trilobites.

Then so is the rest of the Bill of Rights

 

[Lakhota]

The 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fossil. About as meaningful today as trilobites.

Like reservations

Your racist trolling just makes you look even smaller.

 

[Pop23]

The 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fossil. About as meaningful today as trilobites.

Like reservations

Your racist trolling just makes you look even smaller.

Not racist at all. You on the other hand is very much the racist.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Residents of Massachusetts are at liberty to compel their elected officials to repeal or amend the State’s firearm regulatory measures through the political process.

Or seek through the judicial process to have the State’s firearm regulatory measures invalidated.

Currently the courts have upheld such laws as being Constitutional:

‘A federal district court judge in Boston has upheld the state's ban on assault weapons – AR-15 semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines – finding that the issue is not a constitutional matter but one for each state to determine on its own politically.

"The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms,’" U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, wrote in a decision Thursday in Boston, dismissing a lawsuit over the state law.’

Federal judge upholds Massachusetts ban on AR-15, large capacity magazines

There was once a time when Reagan conservatives respected “states’ rights,” given the response by conservatives in this thread, clearly that’s no longer the case.

 

[Pop23]

Residents of Massachusetts are at liberty to compel their elected officials to repeal or amend the State’s firearm regulatory measures through the political process.

Or seek through the judicial process to have the State’s firearm regulatory measures invalidated.

Currently the courts have upheld such laws as being Constitutional:

‘A federal district court judge in Boston has upheld the state's ban on assault weapons – AR-15 semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines – finding that the issue is not a constitutional matter but one for each state to determine on its own politically.

"The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms,’" U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, wrote in a decision Thursday in Boston, dismissing a lawsuit over the state law.’

Federal judge upholds Massachusetts ban on AR-15, large capacity magazines

There was once a time when Reagan conservatives respected “states’ rights,” given the response by conservatives in this thread, clearly that’s no longer the case.

Why would a citizen need to argue that the ban was outrageous, based solely on the 2nd amendment?

Banning anything would require some public health reasoning. Since there is none, then the law should be overturned on that basis alone.

 

[Pop23]

Residents of Massachusetts are at liberty to compel their elected officials to repeal or amend the State’s firearm regulatory measures through the political process.

Or seek through the judicial process to have the State’s firearm regulatory measures invalidated.

Currently the courts have upheld such laws as being Constitutional:

‘A federal district court judge in Boston has upheld the state's ban on assault weapons – AR-15 semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines – finding that the issue is not a constitutional matter but one for each state to determine on its own politically.

"The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms,’" U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, wrote in a decision Thursday in Boston, dismissing a lawsuit over the state law.’

Federal judge upholds Massachusetts ban on AR-15, large capacity magazines

There was once a time when Reagan conservatives respected “states’ rights,” given the response by conservatives in this thread, clearly that’s no longer the case.

Why would the State care what weapon it's Citizen uses to defend themselves against Rape or Murder?

Why would the State pass a law that is completely reliant on criminals to adhere to it?

 

[Lakhota]

Residents of Massachusetts are at liberty to compel their elected officials to repeal or amend the State’s firearm regulatory measures through the political process.

Or seek through the judicial process to have the State’s firearm regulatory measures invalidated.

Currently the courts have upheld such laws as being Constitutional:

‘A federal district court judge in Boston has upheld the state's ban on assault weapons – AR-15 semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines – finding that the issue is not a constitutional matter but one for each state to determine on its own politically.

"The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms,’" U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, wrote in a decision Thursday in Boston, dismissing a lawsuit over the state law.’

Federal judge upholds Massachusetts ban on AR-15, large capacity magazines

There was once a time when Reagan conservatives respected “states’ rights,” given the response by conservatives in this thread, clearly that’s no longer the case.

Amen! It's funny to watch NaziCons oscillate/vacillate between the U.S. Constitution and states' rights to defend their agenda du jour.

 

[Pop23]

Residents of Massachusetts are at liberty to compel their elected officials to repeal or amend the State’s firearm regulatory measures through the political process.

Or seek through the judicial process to have the State’s firearm regulatory measures invalidated.

Currently the courts have upheld such laws as being Constitutional:

‘A federal district court judge in Boston has upheld the state's ban on assault weapons – AR-15 semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines – finding that the issue is not a constitutional matter but one for each state to determine on its own politically.

"The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms,’" U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, wrote in a decision Thursday in Boston, dismissing a lawsuit over the state law.’

Federal judge upholds Massachusetts ban on AR-15, large capacity magazines

There was once a time when Reagan conservatives respected “states’ rights,” given the response by conservatives in this thread, clearly that’s no longer the case.

Amen! It's funny to watch NaziCons oscillate/vacillate between the U.S. Constitution and states' rights to defend their agenda du jour.

So, you can answer the question.

Why would you care what weapon your daughter used to fight off a rapist?

Would you care if it was State approved?

I sure wouldn’t care. The only one probably concerned would be the rapist

 

[Lakhota]

Residents of Massachusetts are at liberty to compel their elected officials to repeal or amend the State’s firearm regulatory measures through the political process.

Or seek through the judicial process to have the State’s firearm regulatory measures invalidated.

Currently the courts have upheld such laws as being Constitutional:

‘A federal district court judge in Boston has upheld the state's ban on assault weapons – AR-15 semi-automatic rifles and large-capacity magazines – finding that the issue is not a constitutional matter but one for each state to determine on its own politically.

"The AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms,’" U.S. District Judge William Young, a Reagan appointee, wrote in a decision Thursday in Boston, dismissing a lawsuit over the state law.’

Federal judge upholds Massachusetts ban on AR-15, large capacity magazines

There was once a time when Reagan conservatives respected “states’ rights,” given the response by conservatives in this thread, clearly that’s no longer the case.

Amen! It's funny to watch NaziCons oscillate/vacillate between the U.S. Constitution and states' rights to defend their agenda du jour.

So, you can answer the question.

Why would you care what weapon your daughter used to fight off a rapist?

Would you care if it was State approved?

I sure wouldn’t care. The only one probably concerned would be the rapist

Look, dumbass, I fully support mentally competent people owning and carrying a weapon - if they meet ALL the federal and state legal requirements to do so.