Supreme Court rules misdemeanors can remove constitutional rights

[JoeB131]

Difference between the two of us, Joe, is that you'll come like a coward when I'm not there and I'd be there when you were.

So you are belligerant and stupid. That gun makes you feel like a real man, no doubt.

 

[JoeMoma]

A person can be imprisoned for a year for some misdemeanors......talk about losing rights.

 

[Rustic]

Difference between the two of us, Joe, is that you'll come like a coward when I'm not there and I'd be there when you were.

So you are belligerant and stupid. That gun makes you feel like a real man, no doubt.

Joe, how does living in your mothers basement make you "feel"...

 

[Conservative65]

Difference between the two of us, Joe, is that you'll come like a coward when I'm not there and I'd be there when you were.

So you are belligerant and stupid. That gun makes you feel like a real man, no doubt.

I said nothing about bringing a gun when you were there. Don't need one to deal with a pussy like you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You can take away a person's driver's license for misdemeanor drunk driving. Is that wrong too?

 

[JoeB131]

I said nothing about bringing a gun when you were there. Don't need one to deal with a pussy like you.

Dude you have issues..

 

[Conservative65]

I said nothing about bringing a gun when you were there. Don't need one to deal with a pussy like you.

Dude you have issues..

You're the one telling me what I should and shouldn't have then doing nothing but taking the cowards way out. You already said you'd come when I wasn't at home. That's what pussies do.

 

[Contumacious]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Yup they decided that the States have the right to ban violent spouse abusers from ever owning or buying guns.

Probably a good idea.

If you are going to beat up your spouse then you probably are not sane enough to own a gun.

And me, I generally believe that everyone should have their own guns -- one carbine and one pistol at least plus a sling for the carbine and a holster for the pistol and lots of ammo and mags for both.

But not for azzholes who beat their spouses.

How many men do you think have been falsely accused of spousal abuse from a spouse with an ax to grind? Use your head.

You do not understand.

Article III states that SCOTUS function is to assist in the creation of a police state . It must also find ANY pretext to disarm the populace and abolish the Fourth Amendment.


.

 

[S.J.]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Yup they decided that the States have the right to ban violent spouse abusers from ever owning or buying guns.

Probably a good idea.

If you are going to beat up your spouse then you probably are not sane enough to own a gun.

And me, I generally believe that everyone should have their own guns -- one carbine and one pistol at least plus a sling for the carbine and a holster for the pistol and lots of ammo and mags for both.

But not for azzholes who beat their spouses.

How many men do you think have been falsely accused of spousal abuse from a spouse with an ax to grind? Use your head.

You do not understand.

Article III states that SCOTUS function is to assist in the creation of a police state . It must also find ANY pretext to disarm the populace and abolish the Fourth Amendment.


.

Unfortunately you are right. It didn't start out that way but it sure has become that way, thanks to liberalism in government and complacency in the citizenry..

 

[Contumacious]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Yup they decided that the States have the right to ban violent spouse abusers from ever owning or buying guns.

Probably a good idea.

If you are going to beat up your spouse then you probably are not sane enough to own a gun.

And me, I generally believe that everyone should have their own guns -- one carbine and one pistol at least plus a sling for the carbine and a holster for the pistol and lots of ammo and mags for both.

But not for azzholes who beat their spouses.

How many men do you think have been falsely accused of spousal abuse from a spouse with an ax to grind? Use your head.

You do not understand.

Article III states that SCOTUS function is to assist in the creation of a police state . It must also find ANY pretext to disarm the populace and abolish the Fourth Amendment.


.

Unfortunately you are right. It didn't start out that way but it sure has become that way, thanks to liberalism in government and complacency in the citizenry..

Four of the "justices" concluded that the individual right to carry firearms is a "NEW RIGHT"

 

[Preacher]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

SC is full of shit as usual

 

[Dana7360]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Good. People who abuse their spouse shouldn't have a weapon.

Too many women have been killed because a known domestic abuser has been allowed to have a gun.

 

[JoeB131]

You're the one telling me what I should and shouldn't have then doing nothing but taking the cowards way out. You already said you'd come when I wasn't at home. That's what pussies do.

No, that's what smart people do.

You see, the thing is, if I know I'm dealing with a crazy person who would shoot at federal agents after a law was passed revoking his gun ownership, I wouldn't engage in a shootout with him.

I'd wait until he went to his Possum Catching job, and while one agent held him up at the office another agent would be at his house getting his guns.

 

[Conservative65]

You're the one telling me what I should and shouldn't have then doing nothing but taking the cowards way out. You already said you'd come when I wasn't at home. That's what pussies do.

No, that's what smart people do.

You see, the thing is, if I know I'm dealing with a crazy person who would shoot at federal agents after a law was passed revoking his gun ownership, I wouldn't engage in a shootout with him.

I'd wait until he went to his Possum Catching job, and while one agent held him up at the office another agent would be at his house getting his guns.

I'd come to where you were while you were there and take what I felt you shouldn't have. That's the difference between us. You get others to do what a pussy won't do and I do it myself.

 

[NYcarbineer]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Yup they decided that the States have the right to ban violent spouse abusers from ever owning or buying guns.

Probably a good idea.

If you are going to beat up your spouse then you probably are not sane enough to own a gun.

And me, I generally believe that everyone should have their own guns -- one carbine and one pistol at least plus a sling for the carbine and a holster for the pistol and lots of ammo and mags for both.

But not for azzholes who beat their spouses.

How many men do you think have been falsely accused of spousal abuse from a spouse with an ax to grind? Use your head.

People get wrongly convicted of felonies on occasion. Should convicted felons be allowed to have guns on the grounds that their conviction might have been incorrect?

 

[JoeB131]

I'd come to where you were while you were there and take what I felt you shouldn't have.

And then I'd have you arrested for theft. After which I would insist to the judge that he take away your guns because you are clearly a dangerous lunatic who threatens people on the internet.

 

[Dana7360]

You're the one telling me what I should and shouldn't have then doing nothing but taking the cowards way out. You already said you'd come when I wasn't at home. That's what pussies do.

No, that's what smart people do.

You see, the thing is, if I know I'm dealing with a crazy person who would shoot at federal agents after a law was passed revoking his gun ownership, I wouldn't engage in a shootout with him.

I'd wait until he went to his Possum Catching job, and while one agent held him up at the office another agent would be at his house getting his guns.

I'd come to where you were while you were there and take what I felt you shouldn't have. That's the difference between us. You get others to do what a pussy won't do and I do it myself.

The difference between the way you and Joe would do that is Joe's way is legal.

Yours isn't.

It's called stealing and you will end up in prison for theft. Depending on the value of what you steal, it would be a felony.

Which at that point, it's illegal for you to have a weapon if you're sentenced to a year or more in prison and you'll never be able to get a weapon legally in America again.

If I were you, I would think twice about posting that you are going to commit a crime on an open public message board.

 

[hazlnut]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Don't hit your wife, asshole.

 

[hazlnut]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Yup they decided that the States have the right to ban violent spouse abusers from ever owning or buying guns.

Probably a good idea.

If you are going to beat up your spouse then you probably are not sane enough to own a gun.

And me, I generally believe that everyone should have their own guns -- one carbine and one pistol at least plus a sling for the carbine and a holster for the pistol and lots of ammo and mags for both.

But not for azzholes who beat their spouses.

How many men do you think have been falsely accused of spousal abuse from a spouse with an ax to grind? Use your head.

Without marks or evidence or testimony there is no case or arrest.

 

[S.J.]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-domestic-abusers-can-be-banned-from-owning-firearms/ar-AAhGgKw?li=BBnb7Kz


your assumed definition of "domestic abuse" has a far wider range than you think it does

Yup they decided that the States have the right to ban violent spouse abusers from ever owning or buying guns.

Probably a good idea.

If you are going to beat up your spouse then you probably are not sane enough to own a gun.

And me, I generally believe that everyone should have their own guns -- one carbine and one pistol at least plus a sling for the carbine and a holster for the pistol and lots of ammo and mags for both.

But not for azzholes who beat their spouses.

How many men do you think have been falsely accused of spousal abuse from a spouse with an ax to grind? Use your head.

People get wrongly convicted of felonies on occasion. Should convicted felons be allowed to have guns on the grounds that their conviction might have been incorrect?

No, and you miss the whole point.