Dems Lose Their Minds, DOJ Makes Concerning
Statement on SCOTUS Gun Rights Decision
Red State,
by
Nick Arama
Original Article
Posted By: Dreadnought,
6/23/2022 5:01:00 PM
On Thursday, the Supreme Court delivered a major victory for gun rights. The Court decided that “the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home” and that the New York law requiring a “proper cause” to obtain a concealed carry license was unconstitutional.
My colleague Joe Cunningham reported on some of the unhinged reactions from the peanut gallery including Keith Olbermann, former acting U.S. Solicitor General Neal Katyal, and former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara. Bharara said, “SCOTUS read neither the room nor the Constitution correctly.” Funny, and perhaps telling that he doesn’t understand that
Reply 1 - Posted by:
Laotzu 6/23/2022 5:05:42 PM (No. 1194714)
Brings to mind the word "insurgency" doesn't it?
11 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
sw penn 6/23/2022 5:10:13 PM (No. 1194717)
KATHY HOCHUL: "I would like to point out to the Supreme Court justices, that the only weapons at that time were muskets. I'm prepared to go back to muskets."
And cannon to go with them?
16 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
marbles 6/23/2022 5:18:12 PM (No. 1194723)
Kathy dear, there were pistols. Don't forget the pistols.
15 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Vaquero45 6/23/2022 5:50:25 PM (No. 1194737)
Wrong, Kathy. There weren’t just muskets. There were rifles. American settlers had them. They were killing British officers 200 yards away. When the Bill of Rights was written, every rifle was an “assault rifle.”
Like all “progressives”, you’re a moron.
22 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
EJKrausJr 6/23/2022 5:57:36 PM (No. 1194739)
To all gun-grabbers, if you don't like the 2A, amend it. Until then, no one has to get approval from the Government to own an arm, carry an arm or open carry an arm. And the 2A does not put a definition on an "arm" that can be carried or owned. Sorry LDB (Lame Duck Biden) the 2A is absolute.
9 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Birddog 6/23/2022 6:03:50 PM (No. 1194741)
Gee...Trump is on public trial right now for saying to the People.."Make your voices heard", and the claim is that doing so is incite-fully seditious, insurrectionist and Un-American.
(insurrection charges are particularly curious as HE WAS the Head of Govt., and he was hardly calling for the overthrow of...himself)
6 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
WV.Hillbilly 6/23/2022 6:12:58 PM (No. 1194750)
Hochul says, "I would like to point out to the Supreme Court justices, that the only weapons at that time were muskets. I'm prepared to go back to muskets."
Is she prepared to give up her internet and right to vote too?
9 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
Birddog 6/23/2022 6:14:13 PM (No. 1194751)
The arms supported "At that time" were the very best, deadliest, most high-tech, accurate, fastest firing, and powerful weapons ever known to man...the Law/Constitution was to enshrine that concept, not the individual types of "Arms".
People were allowed, even encouraged, to outfit SHIPS with multi decks of cannon and a fully armed fighting crew.
PS: swords, knives, pikes, halberds, axes, hatchets, tomahawks, cudgels and billies as well...even fry pans and rolling pins.
Anyone who wants to make the "Musket" argument must do so with quill pen on Parchment and send it by pony rider.
12 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
curious1 6/23/2022 9:38:53 PM (No. 1194894)
The arms at the time included semi-automatic weapons which the founders were well-aware of; the Puckle gun, the Girardoni air rifle, or the Fergason rifle, &etc.
3 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
DVC 6/23/2022 9:48:38 PM (No. 1194902)
Gun hater's angst running ankle deep in some cities.
I LOVE IT. Sorry, this is now "settle law", and your gun restrictions are ILLEGAL. And just like Illinois in 2013, you can whine and scream and yell at the sky, but in the end, you WILL put in place a "shall issue" objective standards concealed carry bill.
Hah! Great day for the Constitution.
And the author is right about the damned idiot Indian who is so stupid and uninformed that he said that the SCOTUS justices "didn't read the room" correctly. They DID read the 2nd Amendment correctly, though.
3 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
NYbob 6/23/2022 10:44:34 PM (No. 1194965)
She is really stupid and really arrogant, the perfect appointment by the rat party for their many moronic followers. Unfortunately, even the average stupid rat for life voter, gets a mental tuneup every time they fill the tank or buy food. This forced education will ramp in intensity when the weather turns frosty around election time. Meanwhile, the rest of us will continue to be amazed by the weird, mask like, frozen expression of this awful woman.
1 person likes this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
ldb51 6/24/2022 12:00:28 AM (No. 1195026)
Just reinforcing that the Constitution (and thus the US) is liberal at heart, in the conservative sense: the government must keep its knee off my throat, and its unrepresented hands out of my pocket, and I DO NOT have to pay for my neighbor's vices and indulgences. If the Government steps over the line, out comes the 2A and it's a frog march to the prison cell or worse. Simple, honest, and clear.
2 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
mifla 6/24/2022 4:53:25 AM (No. 1195123)
Says the person who has taxpayer funded bodyguards.
2 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
SkeezerMcGee 6/24/2022 8:41:03 AM (No. 1195295)
Justice Thomas' opinion includes: "In sum, the historical evidence from antebellum America does demonstrate that the manner of public carry was subject to reasonable regulation, but none of these limitations on the right to bear arms operated to prevent law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from carrying arms in public for that purpose." and, "Throughout modern Anglo-American history, the right to keep and bear arms in public has traditionally been subject to well-defined restrictions governing the intent for which one could carry arms, the manner of carry, or the exceptional circumstances under which one could not carry arms."
Therefore governments can require a permit to carry a concealed arm. The opinion does not suggest or imply that, absent a government permit, people can walk around with a so-called "assault weapon" hidden under their trench coat (like the Mafia did in the prohibition era motion pictures).
0 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Yepper 6/24/2022 9:50:19 AM (No. 1195380)
This Steven Crowder video is worth watching: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CquUBWHU2_s
1 person likes this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "Dreadnought"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)