Sooo, ghetto kids and Liberal wackos will storm the steps of D.C. on Saturday..huh?

[Contumacious]

The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

what other rights are you willing to give up

None. How did you conclude that by citing the constitution I was erasing rights?

sure you are if you are willing to sacrifice one then the others are as meaningless to you

Your right to bear arms, to defend your life and your property will not be infringed in the least if you have to undergo a thorough and universal background check.

Your right to bear arms is not an absolute. If it were, there would be no restriction no on the type of arms you could bear. If the fully automatic firing system was deemed too dangerous to be on American streets, if that firing system requires special restrictions to obtain, how can we see firing systems as dangerous to shoot up school kids?

Yo Nosmo, you stupid miserable dingle berry

Our right to bear arms is an UNALIENABLE ABSOLUTE - an extra-constitutional natural right.


How many Jews would have passed Hitler's background check?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Contumacious, post: 19577934

Our right to bear arms is an UNALIENABLE ABSOLUTE - an extra-constitutional natural right.

No it isn't. Fully automatic firearms are banned or highly regulated.

There is no natural right for you to own one.

 

[Contumacious]

Contumacious, post: 19577934

Our right to bear arms is an UNALIENABLE ABSOLUTE - an extra-constitutional natural right.

No it isn't. Fully automatic firearms are banned or highly regulated.

There is no natural right for you to own one.

Our right to bear arms is an UNALIENABLE , ABSOLUTE - an extra-constitutional , natural right.


.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

How many Jews would have passed Hitler's background check?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Was Hitler's background check instituted as a result of a democratic process?

The protestors today are calling for gun law reform through the democratic process.

Do you think you they are akin to armed Nazi Brownshirts hellbent on confiscating your guns.

If you do, you are sick.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Contumacious, post: 19577973

Our right to bear arms is an UNALIENABLE , ABSOLUTE - an extra-constitutional , natural right.

Writing that dies not make it so.

Explain to us why you can't freely and legally own a machine gun.

 

[Nosmo King]

The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

what other rights are you willing to give up

None. How did you conclude that by citing the constitution I was erasing rights?

sure you are if you are willing to sacrifice one then the others are as meaningless to you

Your right to bear arms, to defend your life and your property will not be infringed in the least if you have to undergo a thorough and universal background check.

Your right to bear arms is not an absolute. If it were, there would be no restriction no on the type of arms you could bear. If the fully automatic firing system was deemed too dangerous to be on American streets, if that firing system requires special restrictions to obtain, how can we see firing systems as dangerous to shoot up school kids?

Yo Nosmo, you stupid miserable dingle berry

Our right to bear arms is an UNALIENABLE ABSOLUTE - an extra-constitutional natural right.


How many Jews would have passed Hitler's background check?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?


.

Then where's your rocket propelled grenade launcher? Where's your thermonuclear warhead?

And how did you get your hands on your Thompson sub-machine gun? If you own one, you jumped through considerable hoops to get it.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

How many Jews would have passed Hitler's background check?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Was Hitler's background check instituted as a result of a democratic process?

The protestors today are calling for gun law reform through the democratic process.

Do you think you they are akin to armed Nazi Brownshirts hellbent on confiscating your guns.

If you do, you are sick.

LoL! They were elected in to power you moron. It was all quite democratic.

 

[2aguy]

11-YEAR-OLD’S POWERFUL MARCH FOR OUR LIVES SPEECH

Naomi Wadler Honors Black Girls Whose Stories ‘Don’t Make The Front Page’

Wow, what an impressive young lady.

These kids need to be marching on the DNC headquarters....and demand that they stop releasing violent gun offenders back into their neighborhoods...but since the racist democrats don't care about black lives, except every two years...this is a wasted effort....if they want to see what a gun free America would look like, especially their neighborhoods...they just need to look at Mexico.....where the police and military with their drug cartel allies murder innocent men, women and children in the 10s of thousands every year......because the people their are disarmed and helpless....

I have thought about that too.
--26 out of 27 of the most deadly mass shooters have come from homes where the biological father was absent. That is a statistic that no sane society should ignore.

--The police went to the Parkland shooters home because of disturbances 39 times. That is 39 times!!!! Wouldn't you think that would give people some pause for thought?

--The FBI KNEW Cruz was a problem and they totally dropped the ball. If they had not, he likely would never have made it to the school that day. Have any heads rolled? I haven't heard of it if they have.

--Cruz's temporary volunteer foster mom had to call police three times when he lived with her and she finally had to send him to live with other of his relatives. She knew he had bought the murder weapon and, during the waiting period, notified the Sheriff's office not to allow him to take possession. They told her they had no basis to deny him possession (after those 39 visits they made to the Cruz home.) There were many other warning signs as well.
Nikolas Cruz's Caretaker Claims She Warned Authorities That Parkland Suspect Was 'Ticking Time Bomb'

--An armed security guard was on the scene but he stayed outside with however many Sheriff's deputies, sheltered in place, and listening to the gunfire inside of the school. And they let Cruz walk right past them with other kids and leave the premises. How can anybody anywhere justify that?

And despite dangerous and unstable people out there, they still keep arresting them and then putting them back out on the street. Especially if they are illegal (which Cruz wasn't.)

So. . . .

Is any of that being addressed in today's demonstration in DC and around the country? Nope, it's all about the guns. Dumb.

You don't get it.....they don't care. They don't want to solve the actual problem...they want to ban guns and they want to beat republicans at the ballot box....dead kids are simply a means to that end...if they cared, they would address single teenage mothers, and they would keep violent criminals in jail.....they don't care....

 

[2aguy]

BrokeLoser, post: 19565238,

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders..

There is no constitutional right to play with semi-automatic assault rifles. It just does not exist. You accept there is no constitutional right to play with fully automatic assault rifles.

You don't get to decide where the line is drawn.

Seventy eight percent of American adults don't own firearms and are not and never will be obsessed with guns.

A larger majority for sure do not feel the need to play with assaukt rifles.

Only three percent of American adults own half the firearms. That three percent has to be the most obsessed.

Constitutional rights established by the founders will not be stripped due to raving maniacal paranoia by those who feel the need play with assault rifles.

Yes...actually, there is.....it is called the 2nd Amendment. And there is no such thing as semi automatic assault rifles.....you are now making up a whole new gun grabber term....

And no, 3% do not own half the guns ...that is another gun grabber lie.

 

[2aguy]

What about freedom of life liberty and not getting your ass blown off by a psycho?

That's easy....get rid of democrat gun free zones and the mass shooters won't attack schools.....we know this because the mass shooters we have captured state they attack gun free zones......

Florida school had an armed police man . Not gun free.

They had one guy for 2,000 students not including staff and multiple buildings on campus...and it was a democrat gun free zone so that normal, law abiding people had to leave their guns at home while the deputy stood outside while those kids were being killed.....

 

[2aguy]

The Original Tree, post: 19565383

Just like The Nazi Youth did in Nazi Germany demanding an end to Citizen Gun Ownership.

It's a lie. Calling BS on you. Never happened.

Fact-checking Ben Carson's claim that gun control laws allowed the Nazis to carry out Holocaust

Read it and weep.

Yes...it did......the nazis took guns away from their political opposition so that when they sent the brown shirts to beat people up, they didn't have guns to stop it....just like antifa thugs today.......the regular Germans learned not to speak up and to go along to stay safe...because there was no way to stop the socialists...

Here in the U.S....when the democrats sent the kkk around to hang black men...some of those black men had rifles, thanks to the NRA, and they stopped the klan....which is why we had our first gun control laws after the original laws banning slaves and indians from owning guns....

The Europeans disarmed their people after World War 1.....when the Germans took over no one was able to effectively fight back after their armies were defeated.....then the Germans sent 12 million unarmed people across Europe to gas chambers and mass graves...

Except the Swiss.....they didn't disarm their people and had 435,000 armed citizens..armed with military rifles.....and there was no holocaust or mass graves in Switzerland...

THE SWISS WERE PREPARED TO FIGHT FACISM TO THE BITTER END | FRONTLINE | PBS



That is why the Nazis despised Switzerland. Joseph Goebbels called Switzerland "this stinking little state" where "sentiment has turned very much against us." Adolf Hitler decided that "all the rubbish of small nations still existing in Europe must be liquidated," even if it meant he would later "be attacked as the 'Butcher of the Swiss.'"



The 1940 Nazi invasion plan, Operation Tannenbaum, was not executed, and SS Oberst Hermann Bohme's 1943 memorandum warned that an invasion of Switzerland would be too costly because every man was armed and trained to shoot. This did not stop the Gestapo from preparing lists of Swiss to be liquidated once the Nazis overran the country.



The other European nations were easily toppled and had little means to wage a partisan war against the occupation. Once their standing armies were defeated, the governments capitulated and the populaces were defenseless.



Only in Switzerland was the entire populace armed and prepared to wage a relentless guerrilla war against an invader. When the war began in 1939, Switzerland mobilized 435,000 citizen soldiers out of a population of 4.2 million. Production figures for Swiss service rifles, which had firepower equal to those of the Germans, demonstrate an ample supply of small arms. Swiss militiamen were instructed to disregard any alleged "official" surrender as enemy propaganda and, if necessary, to fight individually. This meant that a nation of sharpshooters would be sniping at German soldiers at long ranges from every mountain.



While neutral, Switzerland was prepared to fight a Nazi invasion to the end. The celebrated Swiss Gen. Henri Guisan developed the strategy known as defense du reduit--an initial opposition followed by a retreat into the Alps, where a relentless war to the death would be waged. Most Swiss strongly opposed Nazism. Death sentences were issued for fifth-column activities, and proclamations against anti-Semitism were passed at various official levels. There was no Holocaust on Swiss soil, something that can not be said for France, the Netherlands, Poland or most of Europe.



FACT: The Polish People Still Bear Quite A Bit Of Responsibility For The Holocaust


Sure, the infelicitous term “Polish death camps” (which prompted Polish outcry when President Obama used it in 2012) obscures the fact that Auschwitz-Birkenau, Treblinka, and the other Nazi killing centers operated when Poland was German-occupied. But even accepting that semantic distinction, the Polish people still bear quite a bit of responsibility for the Holocaust.

Polish complicity ran both wide and deep. Throughout the country, police helped guard the ghettos, and railroad workers helped deport Jews to death camps. Scads of non-Jews eagerly turned in their neighbors and helped hunt them down. And once their towns were Judenrein (Jew-free) Poles moved into Jewish homes and claimed Jewish property as their own.

Sometimes, Poles organized murderous pogroms independent of the Nazis. Infamously, dozens of Poles organized a roundup of the Jews of Jedwabne, who were marched into a barn that was then set on fire, killing at least 340 of them. And even after the war, Polish Jews who survived faced further attacks from their neighbors, most notably in Kielce, where residents murdered 42 traumatized survivors and wounded 40.


True, some heroic Poles rescued Jews, fully aware of the deadly consequences for them and their families if they failed. (That wasn’t true in other countries, where Nazis rarely executed rescuers.)

But Poles overwhelmingly fell into the categories of perpetrator and bystander, especially the latter. I spoke to Dr. Michael Berenbaum, a leading Holocaust scholar, who told me that “in Poland, people were brutally unhappy with German occupation, but they were not unhappy with the German decision to get rid of the Jews.”

 

[2aguy]

BrokeLoser, post: 19565238,

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders..

There is no constitutional right to play with semi-automatic assault rifles. It just does not exist. You accept there is no constitutional right to play with fully automatic assault rifles.

You don't get to decide where the line is drawn.

Seventy eight percent of American adults don't own firearms and are not and never will be obsessed with guns.

A larger majority for sure do not feel the need to play with assaukt rifles.

Only three percent of American adults own half the firearms. That three percent has to be the most obsessed.

Constitutional rights established by the founders will not be stripped due to raving maniacal paranoia by those who feel the need play with assault rifles.

Lots of mumbo-jumbo andjibber-jabber in your post...how many different ways can this be interpreted?

Are you in a well regulated militia. I see no interpretation of the SA that could progress 200 years into the future that says you have the right outside of participating in a well regulated militia to piay with an AR15 for pleasure.

How does a small fraction of the unregulated population being allowed to play with AR15s preserve the security of our free state?

I think you are nuts. Shouldn't own any guns.

Preserve the free state? Are you nuts?

Most of us don't want you playing with your silly guns under the delusion that you are preserving the free state.

Why is it you asswipes don't do even basic research?

District of Columbia v. Heller

Thus, the right secured in 1689 as a result of the Stuarts’ abuses was by the time of the founding understood to be an individual right protecting against both public and private violence.

--------------


Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people.” We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

-------
Reading the Second Amendment as protecting only the right to “keep and bear Arms” in an organized militia therefore fits poorly with the operative clause’s description of the holder of that right as “the people.”

We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

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.

--------

In Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE GINSBURG wrote that “urely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment . . . indicate: ‘wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’” I

Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

---

 

[2aguy]

D.C. crowd much bigger than Trump inauguration. Estimated at 800,000.

Yes...hitler had crowds like this too, and he wanted to take guns away from people as well...

 

[2aguy]

BrokeLoser, post: 19577352,

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”

Yes in reference to a well regulated militia. You can't erase that part . And it does not address military assault weapons at all. That's why machine guns are banned. That's an interpretation long into effect that establishes that the government can ban certain types of firearms. You have no right to possess them.

Your argument is lost because of the machine gun ban. There is no interpretation out there to save you.

No, dipshit......Heller addressed this and the only reason fully automatic weapons are illegal is because we need 5 real justices on the Supreme Court......

Heller ... please, you moron, read Heller so you can at least lie with the full knowledge of how you are lying...

 

[2aguy]

The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

what other rights are you willing to give up

None. How did you conclude that by citing the constitution I was erasing rights?

sure you are if you are willing to sacrifice one then the others are as meaningless to you

Your right to bear arms, to defend your life and your property will not be infringed in the least if you have to undergo a thorough and universal background check.

Your right to bear arms is not an absolute. If it were, there would be no restriction on the type of arms you could bear. If the fully automatic firing system was deemed too dangerous to be on American street. If that firing system requires special restrictions to obtain, how can we see firing systems as dangerous to shoot up school kids?

A unviersal background check is needed by anti gunners to get gun registration.....universal background checks do nothing to solve crime or prevent criminals or mass shooters from getting guns.....

You guys want registraton so you can ban guns......so no, no registration .......



From Heller showing you don't know what you are talking about...

We start therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is exercised individually and belongs to all Americans.

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.

--------

In Muscarello v. United States, 524 U. S. 125 (1998), in the course of analyzing the meaning of “carries a firearm” in a federal criminal statute, JUSTICE GINSBURG wrote that “urely a most familiar meaning is, as the Constitution’s Second Amendment . . . indicate: ‘wear, bear, or carry . . . upon the person or in the clothing or in a pocket, for the purpose . . . of being armed and ready for offensive or defensive action in a case of conflict with another person.’” I

Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

---

 

[2aguy]

How many Jews would have passed Hitler's background check?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Was Hitler's background check instituted as a result of a democratic process?

The protestors today are calling for gun law reform through the democratic process.

Do you think you they are akin to armed Nazi Brownshirts hellbent on confiscating your guns.

If you do, you are sick.

Moron.....hitler didn't institute the background check system.....the guns were registered in the 1920s using the exact same arguments you are making today......the German people don't need war weapons, they don't need guns to protect themselves since the police and government will do it...and the German people will be safer if they don't have access to guns...

in the 1930s hitler used the registration lists from the 1920s to confiscate guns from Jews and the political enemies of the nazi party...then he sent 12 million innocent men, women and children to gas chambers.....

The rest of Europe took guns away from their people after World War 1 as well...and hitler was happy they did...they too went to the gas chambers...

 

[2aguy]

How many Jews would have passed Hitler's background check?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

Was Hitler's background check instituted as a result of a democratic process?

The protestors today are calling for gun law reform through the democratic process.

Do you think you they are akin to armed Nazi Brownshirts hellbent on confiscating your guns.

If you do, you are sick.

Gun registration in Germany in the 1920s was done with the democratic process dipshit....and then the nazis came in and used the registration lists to undemocratically confiscate guns....

 

[OKTexas]

They will BEG Father Government to strip them of constitutional rights granted by our founders...they will beg to be protected from themselves and the very same lowlifes they stand shoulder to shoulder with....haha
Think about that...you can’t make this shit up. Do we really need to wonder why nobody sane can take these Loons serious?

Ghetto kids?
Lol
Parkland is a high economic suburban area shit for brains.
But I love to sense your fear by how many threads have been made on this rally and movement

You mean this communist movement, just like all leftist bullshit, they either shout down or deny access to opposing points of view. This bullshit is not about the students it's about regressive policies.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Emma Gonzalez. The NRA gun nutters worst nightmare! Go Emma!

The bitch is a commie shill and can't afford new jeans.


.

 

[OKTexas]

Interstate Gun Sales
Federal law for interstate gun sales and other transfers – those occurring between two people who are not Federal Firearm Licensees (FFLs) who live in different states — is pretty straightforward. A person who is not an FFL cannot acquire a handgun from anyone – an FFL or any other person – who lives in another state. A person (the “transferee”) acquiring a long gun must do so through a licensed dealer (FFL). It can be an FFL in any state, the transfer must comply with the laws of the FFL’s and the transferee’s states.

Buying and Selling a Firearm: Online and Interstate Gun Sales | OutdoorHub

Your ignorance is so profound you are a waste of my time.

Up your game Gomer

Private Gun Sale Laws by State - FindLaw
Internet Gun Sales and Background Checks, Explained
Universal Background Checks | Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

None of your links disprove what I said about interstate sales, all MUST go through FFL dealers who conduct background checks.

Like Emma, I call BS! ^ ^ ^

So who’s the new “face” of the DNC...the chick with the dick in VA or little wack-job Emma with a gender that is to be determined?

You can take your pick - Minimally 75 kids from Parkland interviewed and all every bit as brilliant.

Don't watch - It'll trigger you Bigly

And they refused to interview a kid that actually lost a family member, unlike any of the Douglas five. All this is pure commie propaganda.


.