So after the two Sheriff officers are shot, Joe Biden wants to ban Assault Rifles and large cap magazines.


It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.
Fake news. Biden wanted to ban them in 2019. Not just after these cops got shot.
Here's 2019. Delete your fake news thread.
So the progs who said Joe didnt want to ban weapons back in 2019 were lying?
 
No, they don't really want the police armed, either. So just criminals and private security hired by leftist elites.
Private security are not going to die for a paycheck. If things go real south for the liberal elite no amount of money will buy real professional gunfighters because when the shit hits the fan money won't be worth a fuck.

If anything the rich leftist elite will be taken hostage by their "paid protection" so that they can negotiate with the mobs and escape.


.

Preaching to the choir over here. I think literally everything leftists believe about the world and how it works is a childish fairy tale.
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.

Yep. Democrats never fail to try to exploit a tragedy
 
No, they don't really want the police armed, either. So just criminals and private security hired by leftist elites.
Private security are not going to die for a paycheck. If things go real south for the liberal elite no amount of money will buy real professional gunfighters because when the shit hits the fan money won't be worth a fuck.

If anything the rich leftist elite will be taken hostage by their "paid protection" so that they can negotiate with the mobs and escape.


.

Preaching to the choir over here. I think literally everything leftists believe about the world and how it works is a childish fairy tale.

Yes, and you used the right word. "Childish." They are not child like with connotations of purity. They are childish. Mean, selfish, gimme ...
 
Not me, Pete
Got him on IGNORE

Same with me, did it over a year ago. Couldn't stand reading the same shit over and over and over. Been a delight since then.
he keeps repeating the shit because people have him on ignore. Maybe we should go after the piece of shit gang up on his ass and run him off.

Nah. If everybody would ignore him and not respond, he'll go away, but some people are new here or like the torture. The reason he keeps repeating the same shit is because he really has nothing to say. I highly suspect he isn't even an American based on how he writes.
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.
Cause - effect. Rational.
 
Not me, Pete
Got him on IGNORE

Same with me, did it over a year ago. Couldn't stand reading the same shit over and over and over. Been a delight since then.

Yep, me too. Daniel is the only person I ever put on ignore where I only did it because he was just so completely vacuous. I kept warning him to either include some content or don't do a reply to me and he refused. So he's been gone for over a year for me as well
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.
and btw, it helps in rational terms to use a site that actually has the "real" quote.

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden called for a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines on Sunday, one day after a gunman ambushed and critically wounded two Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies in their squad car in Compton.

Whether or not you agree, it's usually useful to actually have a fucking clue to what the said.
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.
Cause - effect. Rational.

It was a legal gun? Prove that
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.

Scalia in Heller made clear that Felons and the Mentally ill should never own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm. Common sense gun control works to lessen the carnage in other nation states, that is civilized nation-states. People like Pete are not civilized.

Scalia removed, "shall not be infringed" from the 2nd A. and was supported by four other conservatives on the Supreme Court.
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.

Scalia in Heller made clear that Felons and the Mentally ill should never own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm. Common sense gun control works to lessen the carnage in other nation states, that is civilized nation-states. People like Pete are not civilized.

Scalia removed, "shall not be infringed" from the 2nd A. and was supported by four other conservatives on the Supreme Court.


Moron........you don't know what you are talking about....he never said never he just said that some laws are allowed but you completely ignore everything else he said.....as in the fact that AR-15 rifles are protected by the 2nd Amendment....you don't want to admit that.....or that all bearable arms are protected by the 2nd Amendment...you don't want to admit that....

What he actually said...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

What you want to pretend doesn't exist...

Scalia ....on which arms are protected...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001),
the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

And so, since you are quoting Scalia...how about you also quote this......

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf
That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.
The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.


Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.

Scalia in Heller made clear that Felons and the Mentally ill should never own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm. Common sense gun control works to lessen the carnage in other nation states, that is civilized nation-states. People like Pete are not civilized.

Scalia removed, "shall not be infringed" from the 2nd A. and was supported by four other conservatives on the Supreme Court.

You don't know what you are talking about....gun control doesn't work in other countries.......the thing saving them, so far, is their populations do not choose to commit murder as often as our criminals do......but keep in mind, they took guns away from their people before world war 2, and then allowed 12 million innocent men, women and children to be murdered by the German socialists........so we don't have anything to learn from them.
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.

Scalia in Heller made clear that Felons and the Mentally ill should never own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm. Common sense gun control works to lessen the carnage in other nation states, that is civilized nation-states. People like Pete are not civilized.

Scalia removed, "shall not be infringed" from the 2nd A. and was supported by four other conservatives on the Supreme Court.


Moron........you don't know what you are talking about....he never said never he just said that some laws are allowed but you completely ignore everything else he said.....as in the fact that AR-15 rifles are protected by the 2nd Amendment....you don't want to admit that.....or that all bearable arms are protected by the 2nd Amendment...you don't want to admit that....

What he actually said...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

What you want to pretend doesn't exist...

Scalia ....on which arms are protected...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001),
the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

And so, since you are quoting Scalia...how about you also quote this......

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf
That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.
The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.



Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

I didn't mention the types of "Arms" bearable, I responded to common sense gun controls.

Q. How do we control keeping bearable arms from the hands of Felons and the Mentally ill?

Do you believe that among these 5 million owners of AR-style Semis, there are not felons, not seriously mentally ill or have not converted their semi into fully auto?

1600274310768.png
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.

Scalia in Heller made clear that Felons and the Mentally ill should never own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm. Common sense gun control works to lessen the carnage in other nation states, that is civilized nation-states. People like Pete are not civilized.

Scalia removed, "shall not be infringed" from the 2nd A. and was supported by four other conservatives on the Supreme Court.


Moron........you don't know what you are talking about....he never said never he just said that some laws are allowed but you completely ignore everything else he said.....as in the fact that AR-15 rifles are protected by the 2nd Amendment....you don't want to admit that.....or that all bearable arms are protected by the 2nd Amendment...you don't want to admit that....

What he actually said...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

What you want to pretend doesn't exist...

Scalia ....on which arms are protected...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001),
the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

And so, since you are quoting Scalia...how about you also quote this......

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf
That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.
The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.



Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

I didn't mention the types of "Arms" bearable, I responded to common sense gun controls.

Q. How do we control keeping bearable arms from the hands of Felons and the Mentally ill?

Do you believe that among these 5 million owners of AR-style Semis, there are not felons, not seriously mentally ill or have not converted their semi into fully auto?

View attachment 389371


There are now over 18 million of them in private hands, after Scalia wrote that opinion........

And do you acknowledge that the AR-15 rifle is protected by the 2nd Amendment?
 
You ignorant pieces of trash are trying to use the hardship of two cops being shot and their families to make a political point.
Yes

and the political point is that democrats are tied to this attempted murder of two police officers
 

It can not be more obvious than ever, from the race riots in the late 60's when the democrook party once again did their best to disarm blacks specifically, the decades of senseless murders in inner cities, and now bed wetters murdering innocent Americans and attacking people at restaurants. Leftists deliberately create chaos and violence, and then demand government disarm everyone who follows the law.

We can not let these pieces of shit win.

.

Scalia in Heller made clear that Felons and the Mentally ill should never own, possess or have in their custody and control a firearm. Common sense gun control works to lessen the carnage in other nation states, that is civilized nation-states. People like Pete are not civilized.

Scalia removed, "shall not be infringed" from the 2nd A. and was supported by four other conservatives on the Supreme Court.


Moron........you don't know what you are talking about....he never said never he just said that some laws are allowed but you completely ignore everything else he said.....as in the fact that AR-15 rifles are protected by the 2nd Amendment....you don't want to admit that.....or that all bearable arms are protected by the 2nd Amendment...you don't want to admit that....

What he actually said...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.

What you want to pretend doesn't exist...

Scalia ....on which arms are protected...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment.

We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997), and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35–36 (2001),
the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.

And so, since you are quoting Scalia...how about you also quote this......

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/15pdf/15-133_7l48.pdf
That analysis misreads Heller. The question under Heller is not whether citizens have adequate alternatives available for self-defense.

Rather, Heller asks whether the law bans types of firearms commonly used for a lawful purpose—regardless of whether alternatives exist. 554 U. S., at 627–629. And Heller draws a distinction between such firearms and weapons specially adapted to unlawful uses and not in common use, such as sawed-off shotguns. Id., at 624–625.
The City’s ban is thus highly suspect because it broadly prohibits common semiautomatic firearms used for lawful purposes.



Roughly five million Americans own AR-style semiautomatic rifles. See 784 F. 3d, at 415, n. 3. The overwhelming majority of citizens who own and use such rifles do so for lawful purposes, including self-defense and target shooting. See ibid. Under our precedents, that is all that is needed for citizens to have a right under the Second Amendment to keep such weapons. See McDonald, 561 U. S., at 767–768; Heller, supra, at 628–629.

I didn't mention the types of "Arms" bearable, I responded to common sense gun controls.

Q. How do we control keeping bearable arms from the hands of Felons and the Mentally ill?

Do you believe that among these 5 million owners of AR-style Semis, there are not felons, not seriously mentally ill or have not converted their semi into fully auto?

View attachment 389371
You want to treat law abiding gun owners as criminals
 

Forum List

Back
Top