NOT GOOD! Federal Judge: Large Capacity Magazines NOT PROTECTED By 2nd Amendment
- Thread starter Dr. Evil
- Start date
The debased judge may have been thinking about dildos, as he felt his womens panties under his robes....size matters to this type of dg..............bigger is better, to it.
Mags are clearly protected by the 2nd, but homosexuals are not.
Mags are clearly protected by the 2nd, but homosexuals are not.
livingston
20×102mm Vulcan
Day will come when the NY reload will be illegal also folks.... Welcome to NY state folks ...
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
Then he shouldn’t really protected by them either now should he be? He’s an idiot.
Are they?
That's like saying you can have cannons for your ship but no fuses.
Shall not be infringed
Worse.
Didn't this puppet say that magazines were protected, but "large capacity" magazines were only suited to military use and thus not protected.
So an Amendment that says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Didn't these anti-gunners keep trying to say that the militia is the National Guard...a MILITARY unit?
It's amazing the twists and turns they try to use to infringe on our Rights.
If the next higher court, or the Supreme Court, don't smack this crap down, then we might as well assume there is no rule of law, no justice, and therefore no authority on the side of the .gov. Society will actually become the wild west where might makes right.
Didn't this puppet say that magazines were protected, but "large capacity" magazines were only suited to military use and thus not protected.
So an Amendment that says "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Didn't these anti-gunners keep trying to say that the militia is the National Guard...a MILITARY unit?
It's amazing the twists and turns they try to use to infringe on our Rights.
If the next higher court, or the Supreme Court, don't smack this crap down, then we might as well assume there is no rule of law, no justice, and therefore no authority on the side of the .gov. Society will actually become the wild west where might makes right.
spat
.950 JDJ
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
It’s not that bad. It’s a DC judge. It only applies to DC. It’s the appeals courts that matter to us.
RedBreast21
6.5 Creedmoor
"common use" applies. No one should get triggered over this. It's one judge. This is how cases move forward.
A magazine is not needed to shoot a gun.
Neither is a stock.
What about:
percussion caps
Ram rods
Sights
Carry handles
Buffers
Buffer tubes
Springs
percussion caps
Ram rods
Sights
Carry handles
Buffers
Buffer tubes
Springs
Not sure. Many of those are needing to fire a gun.
Not all springs.
You don't need a percussion cap, just stuff some hot ash down the hole.
Ram rods are not needed to fire the gun, just reload.
Plenty of guns without buffer tube.
Lots of guns without stocks
Don't need sights to make a gun fire
Don't need a buffer to fire the gun, just the bcg, hammer, trigger, round, chamber.
For that matter you don't need a barrel.
RedBreast21
6.5 Creedmoor
You mean did the founding fathers consider all items involved in bringing a musket to use as part of 2A? Yes they did. "....to keep.." means to posses and "..and bear.." bring to use. The thinking then wasn't that the ammo, powder, ball and patch were items a tyrannical government could ban possession of. That would eliminate the "bring to use" part.
Of course all this is pointless if they have SCOTUS expanded in favor of creating legislation from the bench. What are people going to do? NO NEED TO POST IT.
For any normal thinking person reading a document that was written for an 8th grade reading comprehension level, 2A its extremely clear. But we are dealing with tyrannical entities within our government that are trying to subvert the interpretation of 2A for the up coming generations.
Last edited:
spat
.950 JDJ
They are.
Arms are any tools or equipment used to fight a war. If troops carry it into battle, then it's arms, right down to their boots and MREs.
If they're only suited for military use then take them away from the police. Both on and off duty. The left keeps saying that police are being militarized so restrict them to 10 rounds like the average citizens have.
Not knocking Leo but most if not all of us here know it's bullshit that they have them but we can't
If the SCOTUS was to rule honestly. The intention of the 2nd is for us to be able to fight the government. If the government uses it as part of it's arsenal then we should have access to it. Period end of story.
That_FNG
.308 Win
Why is everyone so worked up? If anything happens you can always JuSt MoVe To A fReE sTaTe
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
There are many other reasons to leave this political shithole where one would wind up ahead in many other ways.
Last edited:
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Please stop with the “ then take them away from the police”. Some of these morons actually do propose that .
Now let’s address that jealously factor of police officers can purchase what they want. In NYS, the second they retire , certain guns are contraband and have to be moved out of state or sold. Yes, there are some exceptions but only because of a federal law and is limited to what they qualify yearly with. And miss that requal, they could immediately become a felon. And most places do not let a retiree requal with a long gun.
And a lot of departments limit what guns their officers can carry. Sure, they can legally carry something other than the department authorized gun but they can lose their job over it, and if they used it, even if it was a justified shooting, their department will not indemnify them.
One the freedoms of retirement is to carry what you want.
And yes, the CCIA gave us an exemption, but it did not do the same for retired peace officers .
It's not jealousy. It's bullshit. Leo's are treated like a superior class of citizens. In NY even corrections officers can have full featured ARs.
For the most part I'm pro police. The vast majority of Leo's are good people but there are some giant pieces of shit that are cops. Those individuals give cops a bad reputation. There have been plenty of examples of bad cops screwing over citizens but somehow they're entitled to own things that an honest law abiding person can't have. NY won't even let military members that risk their life for this country own a real AR.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
Uninformed and Compliant
.450/400 Nitro Ex
According to that dipshit, Govt can ban all but single-shot magazines.
But more, government, here has zero fucking inherent powers.
If they have something, it's derived from OUR inherent rights.
There are no exceptions to that rule in THIS country.
And that means we can have any fucking sized magazine we want. If we couldn't, then it wasn't a power that we could delegate.
QED.
But more, government, here has zero fucking inherent powers.
If they have something, it's derived from OUR inherent rights.
There are no exceptions to that rule in THIS country.
And that means we can have any fucking sized magazine we want. If we couldn't, then it wasn't a power that we could delegate.
QED.
That_FNG
.308 Win
Exactly. If neutered firearms and low capacity magazines and no NFA items are good enough for citizens to protect their lives, then they are good enough to be all that law enforcement/ security is able to have. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Id law enforcement / private security can have full featured firearms, standard capacity magazines and nfa items because of special training, then civilian should be able to take the same training and then own the same things.
Saltwater60
20×102mm Vulcan
Well Biden says you can’t have cannons anyway so…