"Why don't you gun nuts go off and found your own country or something?".
"We did, it's called the United States of America. Now where the hell did YOU come from?"
Deanimator - then I guess your friend's father is a coward with no sense of home. Maybe you can run with your tail between your legs when you don't like what's happening to your home but some people actually want to fix the mess, not plug their ears and sing "it's not happening, I don't care."
Deanimator - then I guess your friend's father is a coward with no sense of home. Maybe you can run with your tail between your legs when you don't like what's happening to your home but some people actually want to fix the mess, not plug their ears and sing "it's not happening, I don't care."
I'm just not interested in listening to the advocacy of retreat, cringe and hide my head.
And, if I am harsh, well, I am sick and tired of knuckling under and abandoning cities just because a sack of rich scumbags have been unopposed in cramming pablum laced with poison down the throats of good people. Chicago is not their government.
The city, along with the Chicago Board of Education, filed a brief with the Supreme Court arguing that even if the court were to strike down the Washington ban, the Chicago ban should be left alone because the 2nd Amendment applies only to the federal government, not the states. (The District of Columbia is a federal entity.)
The argument is based on the selective incorporation of the Bill of Rights against the several states via the 14th Amendment. The Second Amendment has not been incorporated via the 14th.
I'm not interested in tackling the whole incorporation question, nor the 14th Amendment itself at this time. I'm just summarizing the argument Chicago appears to be making.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.