Republicans Continue to Attack the Institutions of our Government Further Eroding Public Confidence!
May 15, 2023 10:11:22 #
"U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) - "Listen, if the Supreme Court eventually says that states or the Congress can't pass universal background checks or can't take these weapons off the streets, I think there's going to be a popular revolt over that policy," he continued. "A court that's already pretty illegitimate is going to be in full crisis mode."
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/chris-murphy-senate-supreme-court-popular-revolt-guns
Oops! I guess I got that wrong.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/chris-murphy-senate-supreme-court-popular-revolt-guns
Oops! I guess I got that wrong.
May 15, 2023 11:05:42 #
May 16, 2023 09:35:43 #
A view driven by a fanatical cause against the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this Amendment means what it says, that citizens enjoy a constitutional right to own and use guns.
Consider that the Founding Fathers enshrined gun ownership among citizens. They could have outlawed guns in the hands of citizens, but instead they gave us the Second Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this Amendment means what it says, that citizens enjoy a constitutional right to own and use guns.
Consider that the Founding Fathers enshrined gun ownership among citizens. They could have outlawed guns in the hands of citizens, but instead they gave us the Second Amendment.
Blurryeyed wrote:
I "U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) - "... (show quote)
May 16, 2023 13:21:40 #
anotherview wrote:
A view driven by a fanatical cause against the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this Amendment means what it says, that citizens enjoy a constitutional right to own and use guns.
Consider that the Founding Fathers enshrined gun ownership among citizens. They could have outlawed guns in the hands of citizens, but instead they gave us the Second Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this Amendment means what it says, that citizens enjoy a constitutional right to own and use guns.
Consider that the Founding Fathers enshrined gun ownership among citizens. They could have outlawed guns in the hands of citizens, but instead they gave us the Second Amendment.
May 16, 2023 13:33:18 #
I think your knowledge on early American history is very limited .... the purpose of the Second Amendment was for citizens to augment the countries standing army. If you were familiar with our history, citizens who owned guns were the first to be called to defend our frontier and put down domestic revolt i.e ... The Whiskey R*******n etc. ... If you follow Hamilton's those who owned gun should have been the first to be sent to fight in Iraq .... Read the Federalist Papers and the history of our country at the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th century.
May 16, 2023 13:38:07 #
anotherview wrote:
A view driven by a fanatical cause against the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this Amendment means what it says, that citizens enjoy a constitutional right to own and use guns.
Consider that the Founding Fathers enshrined gun ownership among citizens. They could have outlawed guns in the hands of citizens, but instead they gave us the Second Amendment.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that this Amendment means what it says, that citizens enjoy a constitutional right to own and use guns.
Consider that the Founding Fathers enshrined gun ownership among citizens. They could have outlawed guns in the hands of citizens, but instead they gave us the Second Amendment.
That is not entirely correct .... The 1934 National Firearms Act prohibits the ownership of certain types of guns .. the act was upheld by the Supreme Court ...
May 16, 2023 13:46:28 #
DEBJENROB wrote:
I think your knowledge on early American history i... (show quote)
Partial t***h lacking the full perspective of the views of the founders on the history of monarchs disarming the people. You are certainly twisting the history of the second to fit your interpretation, Heller as well as the contemporaneous writings of the founders should inform you as to how much context you have chosen to leave out of your post.
May 16, 2023 23:20:47 #
Wyantry
Loc: SW Colorado
Blurryeyed wrote:
Partial t***h lacking the full perspective of the views of the founders on the history of monarchs disarming the people. You are certainly twisting the history of the second to fit your interpretation, Heller as well as the contemporaneous writings of the founders should inform you as to how much context you have chosen to leave out of your post.
Much left out indeed. Like the entire context and writings of the collected Federalist Papers, as well as the writngs of individuals of-the-time.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.