"Therefore, they must have wanted “wife beaters” to own guns."
Therefore it should be ok if the Founding Fathers said that? What do these people thin the Founding Fathers are? Gods whose words and intentions have to be followed down to the letter? (if their intent is even correctly interpreted here)
According to the Supreme Court's logic since the only "arms" the founding father knew were single shot, muzzle loading muskets then the second amendment only applies to single-shot muzzle loading muskets and any repeating rifle or handgun is not covered.
I know a gunsmith who mourns the way the firearms community has been taken over by the assholes. It was always a mixed bag but there used to be frequent sanity.
I do believe that a savvy MAGA type attorney would argue that if the accused chooses to serve life in prison rather than give up his guns that he then must be allowed to possess his guns while in prison. You know, since he was given a choice between no guns or no prison.
The scary part is that I could actually see our current corrupt SCOTUS rubber stamping that.
Yeah, incarcerating a domestic abuser for sixteen months or whatever ridiculous sentence he might be given will help a whole lot. He'll just seethe in prison and then come out, buy some more guns, and finish the job.
This is the fuck that they want to use as their test case? THIS FUCKING GUY?
I mean, when your test case is about getting arrested for burning a US flag in public and then getting arrested for it, you don't actually have a huge number of choices, but with the number of restraining orders issued in the US every workday, they have plenty of choice. And they still went with this guy?
Fuck, man. Republicans are beyond any nightmare Wes Craven could have imagined.
Really? There are actual licensed attorneys willing to say, out loud and on purpose in court, that a man who shot at his former girlfriend in a parking lot should be allowed to own guns? Not only should the shooter remain incarcerated for a good long while and receive therapy, his attorneys should probably face reprimand for making America and our legal system look (more) ridiculous.
FFS. The Constitution was written at a time when guns were single-shot and took multiple steps to load over about 30 seconds, if you were snappy. And 30 seconds may not seem like a lot, but when you're running hell-for-leather to get away from the person trying to shoot you, it's actually a good chunk of time.
And republicans want to crucify Hunter Biden for a gun that was never fired.
If I buy a gun while high can I keep it if I fire it at someone in a parking lot?
Isn’t Ho the same guy who gave us the “aesthetic injury” argument re mifepristone? What a hack.
"So easy a caveman can do it."
Oh for fuck's sake.
How do you think he'll react if they don't give him the answer he wants?
"Therefore, they must have wanted “wife beaters” to own guns."
Therefore it should be ok if the Founding Fathers said that? What do these people thin the Founding Fathers are? Gods whose words and intentions have to be followed down to the letter? (if their intent is even correctly interpreted here)
Oh wait....
W. T. F!
According to the Supreme Court's logic since the only "arms" the founding father knew were single shot, muzzle loading muskets then the second amendment only applies to single-shot muzzle loading muskets and any repeating rifle or handgun is not covered.
I know a gunsmith who mourns the way the firearms community has been taken over by the assholes. It was always a mixed bag but there used to be frequent sanity.
I do believe that a savvy MAGA type attorney would argue that if the accused chooses to serve life in prison rather than give up his guns that he then must be allowed to possess his guns while in prison. You know, since he was given a choice between no guns or no prison.
The scary part is that I could actually see our current corrupt SCOTUS rubber stamping that.
Yeah, incarcerating a domestic abuser for sixteen months or whatever ridiculous sentence he might be given will help a whole lot. He'll just seethe in prison and then come out, buy some more guns, and finish the job.
This is the fuck that they want to use as their test case? THIS FUCKING GUY?
I mean, when your test case is about getting arrested for burning a US flag in public and then getting arrested for it, you don't actually have a huge number of choices, but with the number of restraining orders issued in the US every workday, they have plenty of choice. And they still went with this guy?
Fuck, man. Republicans are beyond any nightmare Wes Craven could have imagined.
I’m confident if the founding fathers were here right now, they’d look around at what we’ve done, furrow their brows in consternation and start over.
Really? There are actual licensed attorneys willing to say, out loud and on purpose in court, that a man who shot at his former girlfriend in a parking lot should be allowed to own guns? Not only should the shooter remain incarcerated for a good long while and receive therapy, his attorneys should probably face reprimand for making America and our legal system look (more) ridiculous.
FFS. The Constitution was written at a time when guns were single-shot and took multiple steps to load over about 30 seconds, if you were snappy. And 30 seconds may not seem like a lot, but when you're running hell-for-leather to get away from the person trying to shoot you, it's actually a good chunk of time.