Guns!

User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
The people have a right to bear arms within the context of "a well-regulated militia." This tells us two things: 1) Militias are to be well-regulated, and 2) You are not a militia unto yourself.
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
User Name said:
The people have a right to bear arms within the context of "a well-regulated militia." This tells us two things: 1) Militias are to be well-regulated, and 2) You are not a militia unto yourself.
Click to expand...
[Scans Heller.]

Nope.
 
way 2 go

way 2 go

Well-known member
User Name

User Name

Greatest poster ever
Banned
Idolater said:
Hmm. So ... not what you said then. Curious.
Click to expand...
According to the current Supreme Court. But even with this decision, they admit that the right to bear arms is not unlimited and that guns and gun ownership would continue to be regulated. This leaves the waters murky as to where an individual's right to bear arms ends and regulation begins. They're just making this up as they go along, which is fine. And a future Supreme Court can reverse itself on this issue, which is also fine.
 
JudgeRightly

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
My right to bear arms does not come from the Constitution.

It comes from God.

That the Constitution happens to enforce my right is a blessing. That the Constitution does not unilaterally enforce my right is a curse.
 
M

marke

Well-known member
User Name said:
The people have a right to bear arms within the context of "a well-regulated militia." This tells us two things: 1) Militias are to be well-regulated, and 2) You are not a militia unto yourself.
Click to expand...
Guns have been legal in the US for more than 200 years, with or without the Constitution. Lefty gun-grabbing commies will never change that.
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
ok doser said:
Worth noting that this is why you are trained, if you are trained, to keep firing until the target drops. He took three head shots before he hit the ground.
Click to expand...
He had ill intent and had drawn a gun. If he doesn't neutralize him immediately he could have turned the gun on him and fired. At that close? Can't blame him for going for the head. How else could he guarantee that gun's not getting turned on him? It was in his hand. He was right next to him. I think a competent defense attorney gets him acquitted of any charges if he was arrested for this.
 
ok doser

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
Idolater said:
He had ill intent and had drawn a gun. If he doesn't neutralize him immediately he could have turned the gun on him and fired. At that close? Can't blame him for going for the head. How else could he guarantee that gun's not getting turned on him? It was in his hand. He was right next to him. I think a competent defense attorney gets him acquitted of any charges if he was arrested for this.
Click to expand...
Did you notice that his buddies scattered at the door before the bystander drew his gun?

Did you notice how the other bystander probably is suffering permanent hearing loss now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top