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.
My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Millennials are growing older, more experienced, and increasingly warying of the older far right, who in five years will not have the weight of numbers in making public policyGood luck with that. Millennials have the attention span of a goldfish and can't tear their gaze from their smart phones for 5 minutesThen the constitution must be amended, and the millennials will just the ones to force that through in the next decade.
Millennials are growing older, more experienced, and increasingly warying of the older far right, who in five years will not have the weight of numbers in making public policyGood luck with that. Millennials have the attention span of a goldfish and can't tear their gaze from their smart phones for 5 minutesThen the constitution must be amended, and the millennials will just the ones to force that through in the next decade.
According to the meme shown above, Mills’ plea bargain was negotiated by the Department of Justice (or in some versions, the Obama administration or President Obama himself). However, Mills’ sentence was seemingly light because he pleaded guilty to only one of the numerous charges against him, and the choice of giving Mills probation rather than jail time was not the result of instructions from the Justice Department (or higher) but rather the personal discretion of Judge Rudolph Randa (who was appointed as a federal district judge by President George H.W. Bush and has a history of making controversial decisions), based on his view of Mills’ contrition and likelihood of re-offending:
FACT CHECK: Did President Obama Plea Bargain Gun Trafficker Dontray Mills?
Notice the NRA nuts have moved the OP from "how do we break the access between crazies and guns" to "you want to take away my guns."
Are you who support that all crazies?
You still haven't told me where the Constitution says your kid has a right to be safe in his school.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
.
The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
“But that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument.’
The Constitution ‘says’ that in the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of procedural due process, where the Supreme Court has held that students have a “legitimate entitlement to a public education as a property right.” (Goss v. Lopez)
Marty does not accept case law he does not like.The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
“But that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument.’
The Constitution ‘says’ that in the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of procedural due process, where the Supreme Court has held that students have a “legitimate entitlement to a public education as a property right.” (Goss v. Lopez)
True.Marty does not accept case law he does not like.The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
“But that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument.’
The Constitution ‘says’ that in the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of procedural due process, where the Supreme Court has held that students have a “legitimate entitlement to a public education as a property right.” (Goss v. Lopez)
But other conservatives reading the post will perhaps realize their own ignorance.
My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
In the combined mission statement and vision statement described in The Preamble, and, in Art I, sec 8 clause 1.
My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
In the combined mission statement and vision statement, described in The Preamble, and, in Art I, sec 8 clause 1. Both give the Congress the authority to provide for the Common Defense, and general welfare.
No stretching at all, my friend, whereas you are trying to limit the fact that the Constitution is interpreted by case law.The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
“But that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument.’
The Constitution ‘says’ that in the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of procedural due process, where the Supreme Court has held that students have a “legitimate entitlement to a public education as a property right.” (Goss v. Lopez)
That is called "stretching". and it's the same garbage thought that gave us Roe, Obergfell, and Plessey.
No stretching at all, my friend, whereas you are trying to limit the fact that the Constitution is interpreted by case law.The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
“But that’s not in the Constitution” is a failed and ignorant ‘argument.’
The Constitution ‘says’ that in the 14th Amendment’s guarantee of procedural due process, where the Supreme Court has held that students have a “legitimate entitlement to a public education as a property right.” (Goss v. Lopez)
That is called "stretching". and it's the same garbage thought that gave us Roe, Obergfell, and Plessey.
My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
In the combined mission statement and vision statement described in The Preamble, and, in Art I, sec 8 clause 1.
My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
In the combined mission statement and vision statement, described in The Preamble, and, in Art I, sec 8 clause 1. Both give the Congress the authority to provide for the Common Defense, and general welfare.
Nice try, but if you agree with that then you basically admit that the Constitution can be interpreted anyway 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers feel it should be, and that is basically legal anarchy.
My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
In the combined mission statement and vision statement described in The Preamble, and, in Art I, sec 8 clause 1.
My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
Where does the constitution say that?
In the combined mission statement and vision statement, described in The Preamble, and, in Art I, sec 8 clause 1. Both give the Congress the authority to provide for the Common Defense, and general welfare.
Nice try, but if you agree with that then you basically admit that the Constitution can be interpreted anyway 5 of 9 un-elected lawyers feel it should be, and that is basically legal anarchy.
The genius of COTUS is its ambiguity, for it allows each new generation to read it clearly and with hindsight. The R's have packed the courts, but they also packed school boards decades ago with religious fanatics and soon We the People tossed them out.
Now, with lifetime appointments we are stuck with judges and justices who have taken the blindfold off of lady justice, and use scripture in place of justice and the law. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of Religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof", but five Supreme Court Justices not elected by the people, and the only triers of fact without a code of conduct, are able to do so.
Goofy libertarian philosophy is just that . . . goofy.
Millennials are growing older, more experienced, and increasingly warying of the older far right, who in five years will not have the weight of numbers in making public policyGood luck with that. Millennials have the attention span of a goldfish and can't tear their gaze from their smart phones for 5 minutesThen the constitution must be amended, and the millennials will just the ones to force that through in the next decade.
That is a pretty good question.According to some this guy introduced himself as a school shooter if that does not peek law enforcemnt's interest, I do not know what will? As far as the whole get rid of the guns thing, any one who would ask for such a thing has never been in a situation where some one else had the gun and were doing bad things to them. If they are ten feet away and have a gun when you do not you lose period! I do not likew thinking about situations like that. I will keep my gun and feel safe in my own space.My child has a constitutional right to go to school safely. I believe that outweighs a nut case's right to own and bear guns.
We need to find a way to break that access link between a nut and a gun.
We need to identify the first problem, which is
This shooter was identified to the FBI....this shooter had 39 previous contacts with local police over domestic issues relating to mental health....so tell us.....how do you actually get law enforcement to do their job?
All of your points have been countered effectively over the years, but go ahead and post.Goofy libertarian philosophy is just that . . . goofy.
And yet you do nothing to actually counter any of the points. You just respond with your typical non-response.
