• You are using the old Black Responsive theme. We have installed a new dark theme for you, called UI.X. This will work better with the new upgrade of our software. You can select it at the bottom of any page.

Second Amendment: Suspended?

Status
Not open for further replies.
CT should impeach their Governor for openly vocalizing his disdain for the Constitution he swore to uphold. This cannot be said for Hussain Oboma since he didn't swear in during the inauguration. They claimed it would be handed privately later. I first thought it was a discrete objection to the Holy Bible but now it is apparent that he doesn't recognize or agree with the 2nd Ammendment and has dedicated his time to destroy it at all cost. If the governor isnt punished for suggesting it, this will spread to other states.
 
The CT governor's shenanigan will not withstand a legal test. It's the deprivation of a civil right for no other reason than suspicion. Let' draw an analogy.

We can develop a list. We will call it the "more likely to engage in gun violence" list. Since it has been shown that most gun crime is committed by people with an arrest record, we can use a prior arrest record as the basis for a frisk search any time any place.

The difference being that the frisk search example would likely have an immediate positive effect.

Further, when you examine the no-fly list I think you will see certain ethnic and religious trends emerging. We all know the liberals will raise hell over that.
 
The problem is that it takes someone who has been actually harmed by the law to file suit to try and get the law overturned. During that process, how many people will be harmed by stupid laws.

True, true!

We REALLY need to STOP re-electing politicians that write stupid laws.
 
My whole point of this thread is to highlight the utter contempt gun control advocates and especially the current administration have for the Constitution. The Trey Gowdy video illustrates the danger if we allow Due Process to be abolished.
 
The CT governor's shenanigan will not withstand a legal test. It's the deprivation of a civil right for no other reason than suspicion.

... example deleted for brevity ...

Saying that something will not stand the constitutionally test is NOT a slam dunk in 2015. Someone with the proper standing must be denied the right and then sue before the court considers it. Additionally courts can be stacked with judges who believe that the constitution says what they want it to say; not what it actually says.

Just like those who claim the 2nd Ammend. was for muskets ... This and many other off the wall arguments have been used to back how the 2nd has been ruled against. So in 2008, by a 5 to 4 margin it was finalized that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. That means that are still four Supreme Court Justices who don't believe it's a right.

chuck

PS: If anyone has not seen the "Is the 2nd Ammend. for muskets?" by Crowder, here goes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CquUBWHU2_s. Even if you have seen it, it's still funny and educational.
 
There have been many presidents accused or suspected of using one of their agencies (IRS,etc.) to come down on political opposition. There's nothing to say a politician might stoop to this. I think I'll change my name to Mike Smith.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top