Ponderable

I'm sure you have some historical quote or court decision to back that up.


As a matter of fact:


1791 top-of-the-line arms --

Revolutionary-Rifles.jpg
 
Freedom indeed! Freedom from the NRA for the US Congress is the goal. The NRA has held the US congress hostage for decades, to the point that Stockholm syndrome has set in.

Having the for profit gun industry dictate our gun laws is like having the fox guard the hen house.
Your source on that?
 
It's sad you need to twist and turn to make the framers intent fit your narrative . . . aka, the plumber is just making shit up, like all nutters do.
Listen shit for brains, I don't need to twist anything ...
What you need to do is read the most recent Supreme Court Decisions regarding the second amendment.
If you have any 1/2 witted comments afterwords, fire away...duck.
 
Listen shit for brains, I don't need to twist anything ...
What you need to do is read the most recent Supreme Court Decisions regarding the second amendment.
If you have any 1/2 witted comments afterwords, fire away...duck.
Heller? " . . . the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated."
 
Heller? " . . . the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated."

The first time the SCOTUS ruled on a case bearing on the 2nd Amendment, it ruled that states could enact their own gun control laws since the Bill of Rights only applied to the Federal government. The court has evolved over time from that interpretation.

"The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendment means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government."

US v. Cruikshank, 1875.​
 
Back
Top