Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Coach is Back! on March 19, 2024, 08:17:03 AM
-
If you’re not already awake….wake up.
U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman, appointed by Barack Obama, ruled that an illegal immigrant has the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
This ruling came about in the case of Heriberto Carbajal-Flores, who faced charges under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), a federal statute that prohibits noncitizens without legal status in the U.S. from “possess[ing] in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.”
Carbajal-Flores, who has been living in the United States illegally, was charged after he was found to be carrying a gun in Chicago during the civil unrest in the spring of 2020.
He and his lawyers have fought the charge, arguing that the gun was for self-defense and citing a Supreme Court ruling on New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen, that New York’s law was unconstitutional and that the ability to carry a pistol in public was a constitutional right.
On March 8, Judge Coleman concurred with Carbajal-Flores’ defense, stating that his nonviolent history and adherence to the conditions of his pretrial release demonstrated he did not pose a public safety risk.
New Deals At The Gateway Pundit Discounts Page At MyPillow – Up to 71% Off With Promo Code TGP
The judge’s ruling claims that the statute under which Carbajal-Flores was charged does not align with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation and, therefore, cannot be used to strip him of his Second Amendment rights.
“The government argues that Carbajal-Flores is a noncitizen who is unlawfully present in this country. The court notes, however, that Carbajal-Flores has never been convicted of a felony, a violent crime, or a crime involving the use of a weapon. Even in the present case, Carbajal-Flores contends that he received and used the handgun solely for self-protection and protection of property during a time of documented civil unrest in the Spring of 2020,” Judge Coleman wrote.
The Court finds that Carbajal-Flores’ criminal record, containing no improper use of a weapon, as well as the non-violent circumstances of his arrest do not support a finding that he poses a risk to public safety such that he cannot be trusted to use a weapon responsibly and should be deprived of his Second Amendment right to bear arms in self-defense. Thus, this Court finds that, as applied to Carbajal-Flores, Section 922(g)(5) is unconstitutional,” Coleman added.
“The noncitizen possession statute, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), violates the Second Amendment as applied to Carbajal-Flores. Thus, the Court grants Carbajal-Flores’ motion to dismiss,” Judge Coleman ordered.
Critics argue that it sets a dangerous precedent that undermines public safety.
X user, The Patriot Voice, wrote, “I want you to read that again SLOWLY, and tell me how we are NOT being set up for some serious action on our own soil with ARMED FOREIGN INVADERS. This is a COMMUNIST ruling, which is sure to PURPOSELY embolden criminals that are coming over our border by the MILLIONS. VERY SCARY TIMES.”
Another user commented, “I don’t want to hear one more liberal crying about guns and banning them, not after the illegal army Biden brought in just got the go sign to get locked and loaded. Whatever your view of guns is, you can’t possibly think this will end anyway other than bad.”
Another said, “I’m a federal felon and I find it ludicrous that I don’t have a second amendment anymore but someone who breaks federal immigration law, gets to have a second amendment.”
You can read the ruling below:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/03/obama-appointed-judge-rules-illegal-immigrants-can-carry/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=obama-appointed-judge-rules-illegal-immigrants-can-carry
-
Clown World!
-
Strategic
1. Military-age men are allowed to cross the border.
2. Military-age men are given free housing.
3. Most of the military-age men are non-black and Spanish criminals in their host countries.
4. Military-age men relocated to black communities with guns and access to Spanish-speaking cartels for narcotics distribution.
5. Los Angeles 2.0 across the nation
6. Whites are building a buffer class that worships whiteness between them and foundational black Americans, essentially replicating a South American tactic.
7. This tactic was presented to white Americans before segregation which South America never had. Hence their black populations are 2-3 generations behind FBA.
(https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/media/filer_public_thumbnails/filer_public/0f/4e/0f4e9d16-6016-41ea-8f2f-51e9ca71a176/malcolmx-timeline-main.jpg__400x530_q85_crop_subsampling-2_upscale.jpg)
Tired of warning them?
You have to be a complete moron to not see why whites want them in the military and on police forces.
(https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/l_brazil_bope_07292015_1.jpg)
Malcolm and I aren't going to keep telling MFers what is going on here.
-
This is comforting news….
-
This is one of the most hypocritical, and libturded things Ive ever heard...
You libtards should be very ashamed... ??? ??? ???
"Lets take guns from law-abiding citizens and give t hem to illegal cartel / US hating immigrants"... ??? ??? ???
-
You get what what you vote for
-
“They” want overcrowded chaos
Demand will be high and supply low just like during covid
-
Fun times. Everyone better make sure you're strapped.
-
Fun times. Everyone better make sure you're strapped.
It’s like the Wild West. Buckle up buckaroos!
-
Fun times. Everyone better make sure you're strapped.
And train with it…..a lot
-
If you’re not already awake….wake up.
'wake up'... lol
no.
it will b a literal slaughter by design:
after grace.. after patient mercy.. after every chance in the world to turn from wicked ways and repent have passed... then comes judgment.
godless white nations have now been wholly subjugated – invaded, perverted and poisoned... there is no coming back.
get right with God.
-
'wake up'... lol
no.
The usual suspects in here and their ilk think this is okay therefore it won’t affect them because they voted for this
-
This new ruling can actually be favorable to gun ownership in the U.S. and may counter gun control activists.
-
I feel for you God fearing Americans.
Still, you have an option i do not have in Europe; you can buy them big guns.
-
This new ruling can actually be favorable to gun ownership in the U.S. and may counter gun control activists.
Not to law abiding citizens. They’re literally trying in every way to strip our rights and give them to illegals and criminals.
-
I’m sure that Oak wants to discuss gun control here... but the Obama factor is keeping him silent
-
Not to law abiding citizens. They’re literally trying in every way to strip our rights and give them to illegals and criminals.
I don't see how you come to that conclusion. If anything this ruling is favorable to gun possession.
In some states it is impossible to get a permit to carry a handgun (NJ for example. NYC too).
-
I don't see how you come to that conclusion. If anything this ruling is favorable to gun possession.
In some states it is impossible to get a permit to carry a handgun (NJ for example. NYC too).
A felon cannot get a gun. But someone who broke the law entering the country illegally can?
2A should apply to citizens.
-
I don't see how you come to that conclusion. If anything this ruling is favorable to gun possession.
In some states it is impossible to get a permit to carry a handgun (NJ for example. NYC too).
How is it we’re getting stripped of our rights (which what basically “gun control” laws are) but illegals won’t have to go the same processes as legal American citizens that are law abiding? To the best of my knowledge, a 4473 doesn’t go beyond US borders and territories. I think I know what some will say about that…
-
A felon cannot get a gun. But someone who broke the law entering the country illegally can?
2A should apply to citizens.
Do you want freedom to own a gun or not?
The guy had no record of serious crimes
More gun ownership is good, no?
-
How is it we’re getting stripped of our rights (which what basically “gun control” laws are) but illegals won’t have to go the same processes as legal American citizens that are law abiding? To the best of my knowledge, a 4473 doesn’t go beyond US borders and territories. I think I know what some will say about that…
More gun ownership is good don't you think?
You are in favor of it.
How will this ruling negatively impact your right?
This ruling can be used to favor gun possession for all.
It may backfire on the anti-gun lobby.
As long as the guy does not use the gun for crimes who cares if he has one?
-
More gun ownership is good don't you think?
You are in favor of it.
How will this ruling negatively impact your right?
This ruling can be used to favor gun possession for all.
It may backfire on the anti-gun lobby.
As long as the guy does not use the gun for crimes who cares if he has one?
Everyone will have an opinion on this. I'm one of those that feel Illegal means ILLEGAL and the law even states that. I see this as something more nefarious for future rights and rulings such as voting. This ruling was based on the Bruen decision where the word "people" is defined, but the in the Second Amendment even though "people" comes up so does the word "Citizen". IMO, "Citizen" means legal within the country
-
Coach,
More and more laws are being passed to restrict legal gun ownership.
It's inevitable that gun ownership will become more restrictive and eventually cease in the future.
At what point do you, yourself, choose to become a lawbreaker in order to retain your guns?
Or do you roll with the changes, obey the law, until you eventually lose your guns?
Will your gun training be used for defiance of future laws?
-
Insanity. The constitution was not written for foreigners.
-
The right to bare arms, as described in the Constitution, is the affirming of a God Given right, to everyone; not a privilege given to American citizens by the Federal Government. It’s the governments job to “protect” that right.
The immigration issue and the firearm issue are honestly mutually exclusive to each other. Illegals should be deported on sight, but the government should take no actions against a God Given right.
Conservatives like coach preach the “shall not be infringed” line but don’t respect what it actually means.
Its not a God Given right to be an American, it sure is to be able to defend yourself with equal force though. .
-
This is one of the most hypocritical, and libturded things Ive ever heard...
You libtards should be very ashamed... ??? ??? ???
"Lets take guns from law-abiding citizens and give t hem to illegal cartel / US hating immigrants"... ??? ??? ???
Exactly.
-
This is absolute insanity and anyone saying otherwise is a wackjob. These illegals are raping and killing people and now we are making it that much easier for them. Am I on some hidden camera show? This can’t be real.
In my world we shoot the illegals and pile them up on the border encouraging other illegals to turn around.
-
This is one of the most hypocritical, and libturded things Ive ever heard...
You libtards should be very ashamed... ??? ??? ???
"Lets take guns from law-abiding citizens and give t hem to illegal cartel / US hating immigrants"... ??? ??? ???
Perhaps they are trying to use the reactions to this suspect decision from an Obama-appointed judge to push for more gun control: "see, even the most fervent Republicans now admit the 2nd Amendment is too broad and must be limited. Let's implement our 'common sense' gun control"
-
Coach,
More and more laws are being passed to restrict legal gun ownership.
It's inevitable that gun ownership will become more restrictive and eventually cease in the future.
At what point do you, yourself, choose to become a lawbreaker in order to retain your guns?
Or do you roll with the changes, obey the law, until you eventually lose your guns?
Will your gun training be used for defiance of future laws?
Where am I not obeying the law? We're talking about Illegals that came over Illegally which makes them....Illegal. You keep mentioning "laws". The Second Amendment is the only amendment that it pretty much written stone and cannot be amended, it was written SECOND for a reason. The Federal Constitution trumps any state laws especially when it comes to the Second Amendment.
-
The right to bare arms, as described in the Constitution, is the affirming of a God Given right, to everyone; not a privilege given to American citizens by the Federal Government. It’s the governments job to “protect” that right.
The immigration issue and the firearm issue are honestly mutually exclusive to each other. Illegals should be deported on sight, but the government should take no actions against a God Given right.
Conservatives like coach preach the “shall not be infringed” line but don’t respect what it actually means.
Its not a God Given right to be an American, it sure is to be able to defend yourself with equal force though. .
the Second Amendment states that as an American citizen
-
the Second Amendment states that as an American citizen
The fuck it does moron. I’ve literally sold guns to non American citizens, here legally, with a green card. Even the fat neckbeard at ammo bros didn’t have any qualms with it. He was sure protected with the 2nd amendment.
What other inalienable rights are illegals exempt from? Due process? Speach?
How are illegals even supposed to go about buying a gun? FFL’s dont accept tortillas ???
-
The fuck it does moron. I’ve literally sold guns to non American citizens, here legally, with a green card. Even the fat neckbeard at ammo bros didn’t have any qualms with it. He was sure protected with the 2nd amendment.
What other inalienable rights are illegals exempt from? Due process? Speach?
How are illegals even supposed to go about buying a gun? FFL’s dont accept tortillas ???
You literally just said they had a green card (permanent residency) which does make them legal. What part of illegal are not getting here? And yeah, FFL’s won’t sell to illegals as I’ve brought up in another post on here. Look at I believe lines 20-23 (I think) on the 4473. You’re selling to documented residents from other countries. Not an illegal with no documentation. And yeah, how are they getting those guns without going through an FFL? 🤔
-
Strategic
1. Military-age men are allowed to cross the border.
2. Military-age men are given free housing.
3. Most of the military-age men are non-black and Spanish criminals in their host countries.
4. Military-age men relocated to black communities with guns and access to Spanish-speaking cartels for narcotics distribution.
5. Los Angeles 2.0 across the nation
6. Whites are building a buffer class that worships whiteness between them and foundational black Americans, essentially replicating a South American tactic.
7. This tactic was presented to white Americans before segregation which South America never had. Hence their black populations are 2-3 generations behind FBA.
(https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/media/filer_public_thumbnails/filer_public/0f/4e/0f4e9d16-6016-41ea-8f2f-51e9ca71a176/malcolmx-timeline-main.jpg__400x530_q85_crop_subsampling-2_upscale.jpg)
Tired of warning them?
You have to be a complete moron to not see why whites want them in the military and on police forces.
(https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/l_brazil_bope_07292015_1.jpg)
Malcolm and I aren't going to keep telling MFers what is going on here.
Interesting rationale. The only issue is numerous US regimes have been anti-White for decades now. Not to even mention corporations and media. Recall Google's recent fiasco with the anti-White so-called AI clown show that they tried to pull off. If nobody complained they would have been elated.
Seems like an ass backwards way to achieve a goal. Instead they could have encouraged Whites to have children, not pushed feminism, homosexuality and abortions.
The Deep State wants to mongrelize the US. Whites, Hispanics and Blacks are all in their crosshairs. This is not an agenda to only washout Blacks. They also need the Hispanics to fight Russia. Whites sure as hell won't after they were duped in Civil War (Brother War) / WW1 (Brother War) / WW2 (Brother War) / Vietnam, etc. Whites have been alienated and they realize now their forefathers were pawns used by the Deep State.
-
Notice how none of the usual TDS retardz dont show up here to comment... ::)
-
You literally just said they had a green card (permanent residency) which does make them legal. What part of illegal are not getting here? And yeah, FFL’s won’t sell to illegals as I’ve brought up in another post on here. Look at I believe lines 20-23 (I think) on the 4473. You’re selling to documented residents from other countries. Not an illegal with no documentation. And yeah, how are they getting those guns without going through an FFL? 🤔
Uh yeah pal. You said “as an American citizen”. Legal residents aren’t American citizens.
And yep, an illegal certainly can’t buy the newest glock at the local FFL. That’s correct. Have you heard of “borrowing” ?
What you fail to realize is that a judges job is to interpret law, not pick “what’s right”. Do I think illegals should be strapped? I think it should be a question we shouldn’t have to answer, they shouldn’t be here in the first place. However, they are. The constitution doesn’t make specific cut outs for Guatemalan illegals. They simply didn’t see that coming. Therefore, the law gets interpreted and we have to live w the consequences.
Just like the Supreme Court border ruling, we don’t like it, but it was decided correctly.
-
Where am I not obeying the law? We're talking about Illegals that came over Illegally which makes them....Illegal. You keep mentioning "laws". The Second Amendment is the only amendment that it pretty much written stone and cannot be amended, it was written SECOND for a reason. The Federal Constitution trumps any state laws especially when it comes to the Second Amendment.
You did not answer my question.
-
You did not answer my question.
We should compile a list of all the crow coach has had to eat for being wrong about shit. I get this hearts in the right place, but he reads headline articles on ambiguous news sources and cites them as fact.
The Kimmel on the Epstein’s plane thread etc.
-
Do you want freedom to own a gun or not?
The guy had no record of serious crimes
More gun ownership is good, no?
I have that freedom.
People who enter our country illegally should not.
Legal immigrants who are citizens can.
Simple.
-
I have that freedom.
People who enter our country illegally should not.
Legal immigrants who are citizens can.
Simple.
^This^
-
We should compile a list of all the crow coach has had to eat for being wrong about shit. I get this hearts in the right place, but he reads headline articles on ambiguous news sources and cites them as fact. Using your logic, it's ok for illegals to legally vote as well.
The Kimmel on the Epstein’s plane thread etc.
Feel free...Illegal is illegal no matter how how you cut it. The judges argument and opinion was based on "people" not "citizens" as I've said before. You mention ambiguous sources as if what I posted was my only source. Almost the entire 2a community is split on this which doesn't make yours or my opinion right or wrong but it is common sense. If you would have bothered to watch the video I posted he shows the courts ruling that he was illegally in possession of a firearm in the United States (18 U.S.C. 922(g)(5)...I, along with a lot of people including two of clients who are Second Amendment Attorneys, with one being the lead counsel for the CRPA, who you might know since he is a local here, disagree with this judges ruling on the interpretation. It'll be appealed I'm sure then head to the SCOTUS for clarification which I'm sure will be based on Bruen which she based her decision on which wasn't text, history and tradition. Do you actually think this ruling would have flew in Benitez' court? I seriously doubt it. Using your logic, we should let illegals vote "legally"
What is the Second Amendment?
In short, the Second Amendment states that as an American citizen, you have the individual right to arm yourself. The amendment also firmly establishes that the government cannot infringe on that right.
The Second Amendment was ratified on December 15, 1791, as one of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, known as the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights expanded upon the Constitution by establishing clear individual rights, limiting the government’s power, and further laying the foundation of American freedom.
Today, the Second Amendment remains fundamental to protecting the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
What the Second Amendment Means
It was no small task for the Founding Fathers to put the building blocks of American freedom into writing. There was much debate amongst them about the amendments' proposed contents. However, they did widely agree on the Second Amendment’s intended meaning. [1]
Let’s take a look at the meaning a bit more in-depth by breaking down all twenty-seven words line by line.
“A well regulated Militia, …”
The term “militia” mentioned in the Second Amendment's opening line refers to the American people. As George Mason described it:
“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for few public officials.” [2]
The Supreme Court has established that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right unrelated to one’s status in a militia. [3]
“…being necessary to the security of a free State…
The Founding Fathers felt that citizens should be able to protect themselves against the government and any other threat to their wellbeing or personal freedom. The Second Amendment granted citizens that right — giving them the ability to defend themselves and their property.
Though times have changed dramatically, the need for defenses afforded by the Second Amendment has remained much the same.
“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The final line states that citizens have the individual right to own firearms for lawful purposes and that the government may not interfere with that right.
The Fourth Amendment, which protects another fundamental individual right, uses similar language. The Fourth Amendment states:
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated…”
This similarity is notable because it affirms that the Founding Fathers intended the Second Amendment to protect an individual right. District of Columbia v. Heller, a landmark Supreme Court case for the Second Amendment, references this comparison.
Second Amendment Court Cases
Several court cases have legally set precedent for how the Second Amendment is interpreted since it was ratified in 1791. The following two are the most relevant to gun owners today.
District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)
On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment guarantees the individual right to keep and bear arms for lawful uses.
The court decision was a breakthrough for Second Amendment rights. It meant that the Founding Fathers’ intention to grant that individual right could not be misinterpreted by those seeking to pass unconstitutional gun control legislation.
The ruling read, in part:
“The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.”
McDonald v. Chicago (2010)
Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling in Heller, some states still tried to pass laws that infringed upon an individual right to keep and bear arms. In McDonald, the Supreme Court affirmed that through the Fourteenth Amendment, Americans have the individual right to keep and bear arms regardless of city or state. [4]
The ruling reads, in part:
“… the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the Second Amendment right, recognized in Heller, to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense.”
Second Amendment Rights – Protections for All Law-Abiding American
So, what does all this mean for you? While the Second Amendment is short in length, it is broad in the scope of its protections.
Gun laws vary by state, and some, such as California, have stricter regulations than others. That means the place you call home may impact exactly how and when you can exercise your Second Amendment rights.
However, if you can legally purchase and own a gun, the Second Amendment guarantees your right to keep and bear arms regardless of city or state.
In simple terms, you have the right to …
Use Firearms for Lawful Purposes
The Heller decision ruled that self-defense is the core of the Second Amendment. The ruling specifically describes having a firearm “in case of confrontation” as the core lawful purpose for having a firearm.
Own Lawful Firearms
The Second Amendment protects your right to own firearms subject to regulations meant to keep guns out of the hands of certain prohibited individuals. [5]
-
More gun ownership is good don't you think?
For law abiting Americans
You are in favor of it.
For having law abiding American Citizens...yes
How will this ruling negatively impact your right?
If you follow what's gun rights and gun control, you would understand
This ruling can be used to favor gun possession for all.
All of who?
It may backfire on the anti-gun lobby.
It may
As long as the guy does not use the gun for crimes who cares if he has one?
We're not talking about one guy, we're talking about the big picture here
-
What a Kvnt...
US hating tyrants these brainless libz...
-
Citizenship is not a requirement for gun ownership in the U.S.
-
Citizenship is not a requirement for gun ownership in the U.S.
I don't know the letter of the law, but does it specifically state the legality of one being here?
-
United states of mehico
-
Sure….lets give illegals guns
https://www.instagram.com/reel/C4v4RxMNxQ5/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==
-
Coach,
More and more laws are being passed to restrict legal gun ownership.
It's inevitable that gun ownership will become more restrictive and eventually cease in the future.
At what point do you, yourself, choose to become a lawbreaker in order to retain your guns?
Or do you roll with the changes, obey the law, until you eventually lose your guns?
Will your gun training be used for defiance of future laws?
Bump for Coach to address.
-
Bump for Coach to address.
Why address a made up situation if you don't believe it's going to happen?
-
I don't know the letter of the law, but does it specifically state the legality of one being here?
As far as my understanding goes; you must be a an adult and not a prohibited person (not a felon, addict, or deemed mentally incompetent).
Illegals can’t own guns. There are carve outs in the law for borrowing. Possessing a firearm and owning a firearm aren’t necessarily the same thing.
You certainly don’t need to be a citizen to own a firearm. I know green card holding legal permanent residents that own a ton of guns. I’m not certain if they are eligible to CCW?
-
Coach,
More and more laws are being passed to restrict legal gun ownership.
It's inevitable that gun ownership will become more restrictive and eventually cease in the future.
At what point do you, yourself, choose to become a lawbreaker in order to retain your guns?
Or do you roll with the changes, obey the law, until you eventually lose your guns?
Will your gun training be used for defiance of future laws?
Ok, I'll bite.
1. In actuality more laws aren't getting passed...yet. They (the gun control lobby's) are getting their asses handed to them every day but like most, they get appealed and go back and forth through the circuits and En banc's for years.
2. It's not inevitable because as of now we have 29 constitutional carry states with the last two passed within a week of each other earlier this month. Thats about 60% of the country along with 470million firearms and trillions of rounds of ammunition
3. At what point? I follow most laws but some laws are unjust and 99% of "gun control" goes against the Second Amendment. Where would you draw the line from choosing to protect your family with a firearm or not?
4. That's why the Second Amendment was written, right?
-
4. That's why the Second Amendment was written, right?
Leftist think the Second Amendment is there so you can hunt. They literally have said to me why do you need gun x for hunting? I told them the Second Amendment was included as a defense against a tyrannical government that's hostile towards the citizens. Their eyes got all big and their response was" "What did you say?" As if I was somehow conspiring to overthrow the government. They are clueless and you won't be able to debate the issues with them.
-
Clown World!
Fucking Twilight Zone.
-
Best gun salesman in history!!
Ghey Barry the Magilla-banger...
(http://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fimg.buzzfeed.com%2Fbuzzfeed-static%2Fstatic%2F2014-06%2F4%2F15%2Fenhanced%2Fwebdr08%2Fanigif_enhanced-3072-1401909334-39.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=d5cf32c89c35f458f4f1f823ec0900ac474d4a42c70e9c7f60b643ebf9d3be0e&ipo=images)
-
^^^What a beast!
-
^^^What a beast!
He's as ghey as the day is long. Magilla banger...
-
Unless you’re an illegal….
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/republicans-blast-biden-admins-red-flag-operation-will-violate-second-amendment-rights
This is why the Second Amendment was written
-
The right to bare arms, as described in the Constitution, is the affirming of a God Given right, to everyone; not a privilege given to American citizens by the Federal Government. It’s the governments job to “protect” that right.
The immigration issue and the firearm issue are honestly mutually exclusive to each other. Illegals should be deported on sight, but the government should take no actions against a God Given right.
Conservatives like coach preach the “shall not be infringed” line but don’t respect what it actually means.
Its not a God Given right to be an American, it sure is to be able to defend yourself with equal force though. .
Good post.
-
Good post.
Now I know its a shit-post if Fagnostic likes it...
Yeah, lets arm cartel members and terrorists willfully...
Retardz.. ::)
And Libz support disarming Americans.... Really brainless..
-
Good post.
Yes disagree about 99% of everything else.
Trump 2024.
-
Yes disagree about 99% of everything else.
Trump 2024.
You nailed it. Anyone in illegally gets cellophaned and catapulted south. And it's beyond the scope of government to find out what's in anyone's pocket or declare what's allowed in their pocket.
There's no contradiction between these statements.
-
Everybody should be carrying.
It's only right.
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/07/07/12/421BD1CC00000578-0-image-a-43_1499426730371.jpg)
-
Everybody should be carrying.
It's only right.
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2017/07/07/12/421BD1CC00000578-0-image-a-43_1499426730371.jpg)
Teach your kids to shoot….along with the Second Amendment, Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers. There’s a few on here that need a refresher course. Then there’s Agnostic who is completely clueless “I’m for the Second Amendment but “assault weapons” should be banned”. Can’t have it both ways
i=OizDwBJYbNuwQwJg
-
Teach your kids to shoot….along with the Second Amendment, Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers. There’s a few on here that need a refresher course. Then there’s Agnostic who is completely clueless “I’m for the Second Amendment but “assault weapons” should be banned”. Can’t have it both ways
i=OizDwBJYbNuwQwJg
If everyone carried there would be less violent crime.
It's been shown to be the fact in communities.
However, if your home is accessible to kids, teens, strangers, then keep your guns under lock and key.
I have a close relative who was a cop. He kept his loaded service weapon on a shelf in the hallway.
His 20 year old son took the gun and committed suicide with it.
Keeping you guns inaccessible does limit their usefulness in a emergency situation like a home invasion.
-
If everyone carried there would be less violent crime.
It's been shown to be the fact in communities.
Unless you’re a criminal in which if you cross the border illegally it automatically makes you….a criminal
-
Unless you’re a criminal in which if you cross the border illegally it automatically makes you….a criminal
But not a violent criminal. That's a big difference.
Someone who speeds in his car is a "criminal". A lawbreaker.
Do you speed in your car?
If an illegal needs to protect himself from violent criminals why shouldn't he be able to?
Enforce the illegality of his being in the country. Possession of a firearm is another matter entirely.
-
But not a violent criminal. That's a big difference.
If an illegal needs to protect himself from violent criminals why shouldn't he be able to?
Enforce the illegality of his being in the country. Possession of a firearm is another matter entirely.
Yeah..how do you know if they’re not if they’re running through the boarder and evading LE running into the country? You don’t.
-
Teach your kids to shoot….along with the Second Amendment, Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers. There’s a few on here that need a refresher course. Then there’s Agnostic who is completely clueless “I’m for the Second Amendment but “assault weapons” should be banned”. Can’t have it both ways
i=OizDwBJYbNuwQwJg
Hamilton, along with Madison and Jay, authored the Federalist, and opposed the ammendments, including the 2nd, which constitute the Bill of Rights.
-
But not a violent criminal. That's a big difference.
Someone who speeds in his car is a "criminal". A lawbreaker.
Do you speed in your car?
If an illegal needs to protect himself from violent criminals why shouldn't he be able to?
Enforce the illegality of his being in the country. Possession of a firearm is another matter entirely.
This is pretty convoluted logic, lol. But you always make this forum interesting IroNat 😂
-
This is pretty convoluted logic, lol. But you always make this forum interesting IroNat 😂
I just like to argue sometimes whether I give a shit or not.
Should have been a lawyer.
-
Yeah..how do you know if they’re not if they’re running through the boarder and evading LE running into the country? You don’t.
If they commit a crime you catch them like any other perp.
There are many laws that are not enforced nowadays. Clown World.
NYC lets violent criminals right back on the street. These are criminals who are legal citizens.
This is besides enforcing the law about illegals which the gov't doesn't do now for reasons that are unfathomable to most people.
Theories about the Dems wanting to make the country one-party run are out there.
-
Hamilton, along with Madison and Jay, authored the Federalist, and opposed the ammendments, including the 2nd, which constitute the Bill of Rights.
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0186
https://ammo.com/articles/founding-fathers-quotes-second-amendment-guns-keep-and-bear-arms
We can start with this
-
Teach your kids to shoot….along with the Second Amendment, Bill of Rights and the Federalist Papers. There’s a few on here that need a refresher course. Then there’s Agnostic who is completely clueless “I’m for the Second Amendment but “assault weapons” should be banned”. Can’t have it both ways
i=OizDwBJYbNuwQwJg
I’d prefer not to expose my young child to lead, thank you.
-
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Hamilton/01-04-02-0186
https://ammo.com/articles/founding-fathers-quotes-second-amendment-guns-keep-and-bear-arms
We can start with this
My understanding is that Hamilton was a putz. A statist who wanted a king and a clueless secretary of the treasury. Guy is up there with Wilson for the worst assholes to ever corrupt the American project. God bless Aaron Burr.
It's midnight here but we can delve in tomorrow if you really want. I think you'll find you're more of a Jeffersonian.
-
Strategic
1. Military-age men are allowed to cross the border.
2. Military-age men are given free housing.
3. Most of the military-age men are non-black and Spanish criminals in their host countries.
4. Military-age men relocated to black communities with guns and access to Spanish-speaking cartels for narcotics distribution.
5. Los Angeles 2.0 across the nation
6. Whites are building a buffer class that worships whiteness between them and foundational black Americans, essentially replicating a South American tactic.
7. This tactic was presented to white Americans before segregation which South America never had. Hence their black populations are 2-3 generations behind FBA.
(https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/media/filer_public_thumbnails/filer_public/0f/4e/0f4e9d16-6016-41ea-8f2f-51e9ca71a176/malcolmx-timeline-main.jpg__400x530_q85_crop_subsampling-2_upscale.jpg)
Tired of warning them?
You have to be a complete moron to not see why whites want them in the military and on police forces.
(https://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/l_brazil_bope_07292015_1.jpg)
Malcolm and I aren't going to keep telling MFers what is going on here.
1-5 we agree on, after that you went full retard, never go full retard.
-
I’d prefer not to expose my young child to lead, thank you.
Didn’t say you had to teach them to shoot competitions. Just teach them to shoot and everything that goes with it once a month
-
The right to bare arms, as described in the Constitution, is the affirming of a God Given right, to everyone; not a privilege given to American citizens by the Federal Government. It’s the governments job to “protect” that right.
The immigration issue and the firearm issue are honestly mutually exclusive to each other. Illegals should be deported on sight, but the government should take no actions against a God Given right.
Conservatives like coach preach the “shall not be infringed” line but don’t respect what it actually means.
Its not a God Given right to be an American, it sure is to be able to defend yourself with equal force though. .
18 U.S.C. 922(g) is the federal law that prohibits anyone ever convicted of any felony to ever possess any firearm either inside or outside of his home. The federal punishment for firearm possession by a felon is up to 10 years in prison.
Being an illegal immigrant means exactly what it says. Illegal. They are breaking a major immigration law. They are felons by that very act. If US Citizens who happen to be felons cannot own weapons legally, why can illegal immigrants? Apply the law equally here. And spare me the they have not been convicted crap. There are millions of illegal immigrants and there is not enough time to convict them all personally. They should universally be marked as felons the moment they cannot provide suitable immigration documents. That's it. And yes, deport them.
-
18 U.S.C. 922(g) is the federal law that prohibits anyone ever convicted of any felony to ever possess any firearm either inside or outside of his home. The federal punishment for firearm possession by a felon is up to 10 years in prison.
Being an illegal immigrant means exactly what it says. Illegal. They are breaking a major immigration law. They are felons by that very act. If US Citizens who happen to be felons cannot own weapons legally, why can illegal immigrants? Apply the law equally here. And spare me the they have not been convicted crap. There are millions of illegal immigrants and there is not enough time to convict them all personally. They should universally be marked as felons the moment they cannot provide suitable immigration documents. That's it. And yes, deport them.
Now THIS ^^^^ is well said!
-
Welcome illegals and arm them with shotguns.
And lots of shells.
-
If everyone carried there would be less violent crime.
Yes, crime rates are very low in urban black communities where everyone carries!
-
Yes, crime rates are very low in urban black communities where everyone carries!
Only gangbangers carry in those communities.
-
Yes, crime rates are very low in urban black communities where everyone carries!
Yeah, only works in less diverse area's.
Everyone carries here (NH) almost zero gun crime... Its also mostly white..
-
Yes, crime rates are very low in urban black communities where everyone carries!
You convinced me. No more guns for urban black communities.
-
More of Obozo's Children...
(https://media.feministcurrent.com/uploads/2022/06/Screen-Shot-2022-06-25-at-2.05.32-PM.png)
-
You nailed it. Anyone in illegally gets cellophaned and catapulted south. And it's beyond the scope of government to find out what's in anyone's pocket or declare what's allowed in their pocket.
There's no contradiction between these statements.
Absolutely not. If they are found to be in possession of narcotics or any other illegal contraband, charge them. If they are a prohibited person from owning a firearm, by either being a convicted/deported felon, being an admitted addict, being under a current restraining order etc or the firearm is stolen, unregistered, etc “ghost gun” etc charge them.
18 U.S.C. 922(g) is the federal law that prohibits anyone ever convicted of any felony to ever possess any firearm either inside or outside of his home. The federal punishment for firearm possession by a felon is up to 10 years in prison.
Being an illegal immigrant means exactly what it says. Illegal. They are breaking a major immigration law. They are felons by that very act. If US Citizens who happen to be felons cannot own weapons legally, why can illegal immigrants? Apply the law equally here. And spare me the they have not been convicted crap. There are millions of illegal immigrants and there is not enough time to convict them all personally. They should universally be marked as felons the moment they cannot provide suitable immigration documents. That's it. And yes, deport them.
I’m not going to spare you the convicted crap. That’s a cornerstone of our legal system. Committing a felony is not the same thing as being convicted of a felony. There is no universal “marking” as a felon. We can’t just make shit up as we go.
I also don’t believe that being convicted of a felony of every case should bar you from gun ownership. Violent sure, moral turpitude, sure.
Should a 45 year old who was convicted of felony drug possession when he was 18 be barred for life? Rob someone, fucked for life, all good with that.
A lot of the “so called” 2nd amendment community really likes to pick and choose.
Tons of getbiggers routinely engage in narcotics activity but think that felony doesn’t count, they don’t feel that’s a real crime so no biggie.
-
More of Obozo's Children...
(https://media.feministcurrent.com/uploads/2022/06/Screen-Shot-2022-06-25-at-2.05.32-PM.png)
Who in the fuck would allow their children to sit on the laps of these weirdos?
-
Q: Who in the fuck would allow their children to sit on the laps of these weirdos?
A: Insane Libturdz
-
More of Obozo's Children...
(https://media.feministcurrent.com/uploads/2022/06/Screen-Shot-2022-06-25-at-2.05.32-PM.png)
Decent shoulder development on the pedobrew
-
Imagine the retardz letting their kids be groomed by these insane perverts???
Sitting on the clown lap???
WTF is wrong with libturdz??? ??? ??? ???
-
Reading is fun-da-mentalcase.
-
Decent shoulder development on the pedobrew
Hair and all.
-
Reading is fun-da-mentalcase.
I like it, I like! 8)
-
Yup, lets give them some guns... ::) ::) ::)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/house-republicans-hammer-biden-as-illegal-immigrant-is-linked-to-michigan-woman-s-murder/ar-BB1kDyjk?ocid=socialshare&pc=U531&cvid=33dd86744c664a388a2dd757a5dc2a20&ei=61&fbclid=IwAR3ZZNCjCd1v58jJ9Q6wxdLRCI0t8zn7iUV9bRVHc9LaJhRyOLU81CJjrok
In a statement to Fox News Digital, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) spokesperson confirmed that Ortiz-Vite was in the country illegally at the time of Garcia's death and that he was previously deported to Mexico in 2020.
It comes after the death of Laken Riley, a 22-year-old Georgia nursing student who was killed while jogging on the University of Georgia campus. Riley’s suspected killer, from Venezuela, arrived in the U.S. illegally. Officials said they did not know each other.
"An illegal migrant has been charged with murdering 25-year-old Ruby Garcia from Michigan. The murderer, Brandon Ortiz-Vite, had been deported then re-entered our country illegally. Under Biden, innocent lives are being cut short by people here illegally. Enough is enough," said Rep. Richard Hudson, R-N.C., chairman of the House Republicans’ campaign arm.
-
I’m not going to spare you the convicted crap. That’s a cornerstone of our legal system. Committing a felony is not the same thing as being convicted of a felony. There is no universal “marking” as a felon. We can’t just make shit up as we go.
I also don’t believe that being convicted of a felony of every case should bar you from gun ownership. Violent sure, moral turpitude, sure.
Should a 45 year old who was convicted of felony drug possession when he was 18 be barred for life? Rob someone, fucked for life, all good with that.
A lot of the “so called” 2nd amendment community really likes to pick and choose.
Tons of getbiggers routinely engage in narcotics activity but think that felony doesn’t count, they don’t feel that’s a real crime so no biggie.
As I explained, all illegal immigrants are exactly what they are labelled as. Illegal. Non legal. Against the legal system. They busted illegally into the USA. There are millions of illegal immigrants. It is impossible to prosecute them all. But we all know they committed an illegal act by entering the US illegally.
This means they should be barred from owning guns, just like any convicted felon in the US is. Because you know very well each one would be convicted of a felony if they were objectively scrutinized by the legal system. If the legal system finds them not guilty we might as well just throw out the immigration laws and say the USA does not exist anymore. It's open for the whole world to come and go as they please! Surely you understand this, right?
It's really simple. You want to buy a gun? Please show me your immigration status. And gun owners should be allowed to ask for that if somebody in broken English who's obviously not from around here shows up to buy a gun. If I was a legal immigrant with a heavy accent I would not have a problem with this at all. I'd be happy to provide my immigration status. If they can't prove their immigration status they can't buy the gun.
-
As I explained, all illegal immigrants are exactly what they are labelled as. Illegal. Non legal. Against the legal system. They busted illegally into the USA. There are millions of illegal immigrants. It is impossible to prosecute them all. But we all know they committed an illegal act by entering the US illegally.
This means they should be barred from owning guns, just like any convicted felon in the US is. Because you know very well each one would be convicted of a felony if they were objectively scrutinized by the legal system. If the legal system finds them not guilty we might as well just throw out the immigration laws and say the USA does not exist anymore. It's open for the whole world to come and go as they please! Surely you understand this, right?
It's really simple. You want to buy a gun? Please show me your immigration status. And gun owners should be allowed to ask for that if somebody in broken English who's obviously not from around here shows up to buy a gun. If I was a legal immigrant with a heavy accent I would not have a problem with this at all. I'd be happy to provide my immigration status. If they can't prove their immigration status they can't buy the gun.
You’re still stuck on feelings vs. fact. I understand you and I agree with your sentiment. Illegals shouldn’t have shit.
We just don’t live (thankfully) in a presumed guilty system (yet).
Like I said, they can’t buy guns. For sure 100%. A lot of illegals have legal children though, and borrowing guns exists. It’s not incumbent upon you to verify anyone’s citizen status. That’s the duty of the FFL.
-
You’re still stuck on feelings vs. fact. I understand you and I agree with your sentiment. Illegals shouldn’t have shit.
We just don’t live (thankfully) in a presumed guilty system (yet).
Like I said, they can’t buy guns. For sure 100%. A lot of illegals have legal children though, and borrowing guns exists. It’s not incumbent upon you to verify anyone’s citizen status. That’s the duty of the FFL.
An FFL is only running the background check on the person buying the gun, not his family history. The problem is the courts saying that illegals have the same rights as citizens. Where is the motivation for these people to come into the country legally?
-
An FFL is only running the background check on the person buying the gun, not his family history. The problem is the courts saying that illegals have the same rights as citizens. Where is the motivation for these people to come into the country legally?
The bill of rights doesn’t say anything about citizens. Not certain the word is even used.
Should an illegal in this country also not have the right to freedom of speech or lose protection against cruel or unusual punishment? Right to a speedy trial?
-
As I explained, all illegal immigrants are exactly what they are labelled as. Illegal. Non legal. Against the legal system. They busted illegally into the USA. There are millions of illegal immigrants. It is impossible to prosecute them all. But we all know they committed an illegal act by entering the US illegally.
This means they should be barred from owning guns, just like any convicted felon in the US is. Because you know very well each one would be convicted of a felony if they were objectively scrutinized by the legal system. If the legal system finds them not guilty we might as well just throw out the immigration laws and say the USA does not exist anymore. It's open for the whole world to come and go as they please! Surely you understand this, right?
It's really simple. You want to buy a gun? Please show me your immigration status. And gun owners should be allowed to ask for that if somebody in broken English who's obviously not from around here shows up to buy a gun. If I was a legal immigrant with a heavy accent I would not have a problem with this at all. I'd be happy to provide my immigration status. If they can't prove their immigration status they can't buy the gun.
If you want to sell your property you can sell it to anyone you want. A gun to a mexican. A farm to a chinaman. The government is not part owner of your property.
-
The bill of rights doesn’t say anything about citizens. Not certain the word is even used.
Should an illegal in this country also not have the right to freedom of speech or lose protection against cruel or unusual punishment? Right to a speedy trial?
They should have no rights, and get shipped back to the cesspool they came from...
-
They should have no rights, and get shipped back to the cesspool they came from...
No kidding, they are here ILLEGALLY! Do prisoners have the same rights?
-
Imagine being a whiny TDS anti-US libturdian?? ::)
-
No kidding, they are here ILLEGALLY! Do prisoners have the same rights?
Of course. Right to a speedy trial, protections against cruel and unusual punishment.
If you want to sell your property you can sell it to anyone you want. A gun to a mexican. A farm to a chinaman. The government is not part owner of your property.
Yep. It should be societally shunned to sell shit to China, but not legislated. A lot of these Fox News brand conservatives love spouting how much they are for freedom, but love tossing asterisks around when it’s something they take issue with. “Government shouldn’t tell me what I can and can’t do, but hell yeah it should be illegal to shout Death to America” etc etc.
-
Fortunately, after letting this settle for a bit to get a better consensus seems most of the 2A community including 2A attorneys is in agreement that this is unconstitutional. Illegal is still illegal. If you’re illegal, get legal, buy a gun legally. Period. Yes, I know there’s a difference between a Federal Constitution and a states law.
-
Fortunately, after letting this settle for a bit to get a better consensus seems most of the 2A community including 2A attorneys is in agreement that this is unconstitutional. Illegal is still illegal. If you’re illegal, get legal, buy a gun legally. Period. Yes, I know there’s a difference between a Federal Constitution and a states law.
The phrase “2a community” is disgusting “front line worker” tier new-speak and shouldn’t be taken seriously.
-
The phrase “2a community” is disgusting “front line worker” tier new-speak and shouldn’t be taken seriously.
Another opinion. You just discounted everyone and any 2A civil rights organizations that have a voice. That also goes for anybody that contributes to it and keeps up with it and is involved with it.
-
Another opinion. You just discounted any one and any 2A civil rights organizations that have a voice. That also goes for anybody that contributes to it and keeps up with it and involved with it.
Quite the opposite, Coach. The term is really a tool of the opposition to make it seem like it’s a fringe group or a hobby group. It should be every American. Would ever say the “vehicle driving community”?
-
Quite the opposite, Coach. The term is really a tool of the opposition to make it seem like it’s a fringe group or a hobby group. It should be every American. Would ever say the “vehicle driving community”?
Right vs. privilege
-
Right vs. privilege
I’m not tracking.