Get educated! You only ever have is your opinions never facts! But But the 2A says!
Again show me a Court case or history to support your opinion!
NYPD warns cops about New Jersey firearms law
- Thread starter livingston
- Start date
Get educated! You only ever have is your opinions never facts! But But the 2A says!
Again show me a Court case or history to support your opinion!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Forget it man. You willfully ignore corruption and impartial decisions. Every thread is the same shit with you. You know what it says. I know what it says and the judges know what it says.
You love those infringements that's why you defend their corruption. I know what kind cloth you are made of. Your wear it proudly. You advertise it on your Signature. You love Fudd guns. You love needing permission to carry. The Safe Act was the best thing that ever happened to you because we don't need all that right?
Who the hell would put that in their signature? You would.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Thank you for the support.
Scalia was talking about where the limitations were . But note, he mentioned a few and others have to be decided.
Again even the gun community does not have a concensus where it begins and ends.
The 1st admendment can require parade permits. But they have to issue them. I’m a “shall issue” type guy when it comes to carry.
I liked how a certain sheriff in PA gave out out of residence carry permits. I walked in, gave my ID and was out with a permit in twenty minutes.
My Utah permit was good too.
That’s how it should be in my opinion.
And note, that was for concealed carry and not to own or/and have in the house.
So if Willy wants to debate the constitution, We can . But let’s do it on another thread.
So you are really showing you're ignorance and have to resort to name calling and insults! You just can't show any proof to support your opinion!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
As per the Constitution, parade permits on infringements on the first amendment too.
Just because one infringement is allowed, it doesn't mean that other infringement should be allowed too.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
It's not an opinion. It's written fact. And if name-calling is pointing out what you write in your Sig , then it's name-calling. Think what you want.
It's a Quote Jerk-off!!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
What's quote? I'm talking about written fact in the Constiution and no where does it say that the right to keep and bear arms cannot be infringed except under certain circumstances.
You are taking this personal not me. If pointing out what you write in your signature and your previous comments about modern sporting rifles are insults, then I'm an asshole.
Never said anything about MSR's!!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Yes you did. One post was about something to the effect of that a Fudd gun can do whatever a MSR can do so why bother.
But anyway, if I took that out of context, than scratch that. Tell me why you love their Heller decision so much that you would put it in your Sig? Are you against constitutional carry?
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Okay, we can disagree. It’s seems that everyone is wrong about the constitution including the SCOTUS judge who wrote Heller. Everyone but you.
And now you expect everyone to see it your way , lose their jobs, etc.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Yes.
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Come back to reality. Go back and read the text again, then educate what the words meant at the time they were written like Scalia did.
He really did the research and made decisions based on it. Each word and comma was carefully planned when written.
Your really reaching!
Heller is in my Sig because so many bitch about there CCW Constitutional right's being violated! They are not and that is why they keep losing Court case's!! Google is Concealed Carry a Constitutional Right do the same on YouTube or Facebook!
See you never show any proof to back up your claims!
49 states issue CCW's (Vermont non needed)
45 states have open carry (12 of then require a license, which may be able to be overturned in Court!)
A few states now have what they call Constitutional Carry no license for either!
Now I posted Scalia's interviews for a reason! What the text meant at the time (Not what it says reading it at this time) for over 200 year concealed weapons were prohibited before the BOR's so when the BOR's was ratified the Colonist did not give up anything as they all carried openly!
Please prove that I am wrong!!!
Now for the brass tacks! You want to turn the so called Sullivan Act on it's ear fight for Open Carry in NYS! (And no I would rather carry concealed) But what do you think would happen if NYS was forced to allow Open Carry?
So Marine you keep up your frontal attack if you really think that will work!!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
So I guess there are limitations too to quartering soldiers in your home in peacetime in times of War and there are limitations to what religions you can practice too because you have to take into consideration how it was back then.
It's written in plain English. There is no code words or ulterior meanings.
The Constitution has been stripped little by little work decision after decision. Only some 4th amendment rights can be violated. Like in a car for example. Some guns can be infringed upon from bearing. Like concealed pistols for example. And in the future certain words will be infringed upon for public safety.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Haha. What the text meant at the time. Yes. It meant that some infringement are allowed. Okay.
Speaking of text, did you read the declaration of Independence where it states that when a government becomes tyrannical it must dispose of it and have the tools to do so? I wonder what they really meant at that time?
Perhaps they meant peacefully because back then there were gentleman?
Don't give me that BS.
And what do those states issuing licenses have to do with anything? Are you saying that because they infringe on the rights of citizens that that makes it right and that are going as per the Constitution?
And were in the Second Amendment does it say how you can bear an arm? So because they carried openly that's the only method that's allowed right? So must we carry single shot pistols too?
Come on.
Back then there were no muslim religions either in America. Can we stop others from practicing that particular religion since there wasn't anyone commonly practicing them back then in America?
Last edited:
What the text meant the time, Your the one who keeps saying what the Founder meant are you NOT?
Do some research Jr I have!!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Yes what they actually wrote down. It's not that hard.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Yes. You researched corrupt decisions and are naive enough to accept them.
You are the one who is hopeless!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Ok. If you say so. And and quit putting exclamation points after every sentence. That's not proper English.
Is that too in the Constitution!
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
No.
I can't stand it.
It pisses me off no end.
Time for some more rum and to play with me thimble.
It pisses me off no end.
Time for some more rum and to play with me thimble.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
First Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Hmmm. Back then they only had to deal with certain religions. I don't think the founders meant Muslims. And back then speech was only spoken and written. They didn't intend it to apply to the internet and TV.
Second Amendment
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.
Hmmm. Back then people only beared arms openly. That didn't apply to concealed arms. Some people did but they weren't gentleman. They were cowards and crooks. Back then they only had muskets. I think when the founders wrote it they really didn't mean any arm. Only common arms. Not dangerous and unusual ones. Yeah. I'll rule like that. It's not unlimited.
Third Amendment
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner; nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Hmmm. Back then there weren't banks and financial institutions that actually owned the house like they do today. I think they meant actual owners. Since some people don't actually own the house, we can quarter soldiers in them as long as we get the bank's approval.
Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Hmmm. Let's see. Back then there were no cars. The founders couldn't possibly mean that it applies to someone's car. Is a car an effect? No. Can't be. There were no cars.
Fifth Amendment
You get the point.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Hmmm. Back then they only had to deal with certain religions. I don't think the founders meant Muslims. And back then speech was only spoken and written. They didn't intend it to apply to the internet and TV.
Second Amendment
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.
Hmmm. Back then people only beared arms openly. That didn't apply to concealed arms. Some people did but they weren't gentleman. They were cowards and crooks. Back then they only had muskets. I think when the founders wrote it they really didn't mean any arm. Only common arms. Not dangerous and unusual ones. Yeah. I'll rule like that. It's not unlimited.
Third Amendment
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner; nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.
Hmmm. Back then there weren't banks and financial institutions that actually owned the house like they do today. I think they meant actual owners. Since some people don't actually own the house, we can quarter soldiers in them as long as we get the bank's approval.
Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Hmmm. Let's see. Back then there were no cars. The founders couldn't possibly mean that it applies to someone's car. Is a car an effect? No. Can't be. There were no cars.
Fifth Amendment
You get the point.
Last edited:
Truebeliever
6.5 Creedmoor
Dude, we can debate the meaning of the second admendment, the federalist papers, etc.
Each word and comma, had a meaning. Scalia is the man who persuaded four other justices to rule correctly on Heller. It was a close one.
He researched it and it was his argument of every word made a difference.
He looked for the meaning of the words when it was written and not just of today. Handguns are protected thanks to him. The original target of the anti gunners.
It was also pointed out that repeating weapons were available and known to the lawmakers. And they wanted them. They just weren’t practical yet. But they weren’t banned.
But as he pointed out that certain axe weapons were. He ruled out non man portable weapons in that interview ( non binding) . In another taped interview he talked about the comma between the well regulated militia and the right of the people . And what a militia was at that time. A militia then was not the national guard of today.
Again , we can debate this all day on another thread .
Police are not the standard one should hold the public to , the average cop is less armed than you.
Do you want the restrictions of what active could carry ? Imagine only having a choice of two firearms to carry on and off duty. You could not carry any other gun without losing your job. And your ability to carry at all because most cops in NYS can not get a permit while a cop. They have to carry “on the badge”. Those two guns aren’t your choice.Sone can only carry their service gun and the department picked it.
Do you think the red flag laws are new to police? Cops could end up on the rubber gun squad on a whim. No due process. Suspended for not arresting someone, no guns for you.
So cops could carry standard capacity magazines in a gun that their department chose. And in NYS retire with those magazines only( the only above 10 round magazines to a gun the cop might not even really want but bought for his employment.
Some of us could carry what ever we wanted , sure and some of us could only carry one gun. ONE, and not chosen by the cop.
Or how about this guys who had to carry but only with guns with an increased trigger pull.
The first taste of gun freedom I felt was soon after I retired, I walked around PA with a gun in caliber I chose. That I chose that didn’t need approval from the ran department. That I chose after 20 something years of carrying with limited choices.
And in N.J., the cops have purchase their gun thru the same system as everyone else for each gun. Some didn’t get their guns in time for academy training.
So they get to have a 15 round or 17!round with the new laws admendment. Good for them.
Each word and comma, had a meaning. Scalia is the man who persuaded four other justices to rule correctly on Heller. It was a close one.
He researched it and it was his argument of every word made a difference.
He looked for the meaning of the words when it was written and not just of today. Handguns are protected thanks to him. The original target of the anti gunners.
It was also pointed out that repeating weapons were available and known to the lawmakers. And they wanted them. They just weren’t practical yet. But they weren’t banned.
But as he pointed out that certain axe weapons were. He ruled out non man portable weapons in that interview ( non binding) . In another taped interview he talked about the comma between the well regulated militia and the right of the people . And what a militia was at that time. A militia then was not the national guard of today.
Again , we can debate this all day on another thread .
Police are not the standard one should hold the public to , the average cop is less armed than you.
Do you want the restrictions of what active could carry ? Imagine only having a choice of two firearms to carry on and off duty. You could not carry any other gun without losing your job. And your ability to carry at all because most cops in NYS can not get a permit while a cop. They have to carry “on the badge”. Those two guns aren’t your choice.Sone can only carry their service gun and the department picked it.
Do you think the red flag laws are new to police? Cops could end up on the rubber gun squad on a whim. No due process. Suspended for not arresting someone, no guns for you.
So cops could carry standard capacity magazines in a gun that their department chose. And in NYS retire with those magazines only( the only above 10 round magazines to a gun the cop might not even really want but bought for his employment.
Some of us could carry what ever we wanted , sure and some of us could only carry one gun. ONE, and not chosen by the cop.
Or how about this guys who had to carry but only with guns with an increased trigger pull.
The first taste of gun freedom I felt was soon after I retired, I walked around PA with a gun in caliber I chose. That I chose that didn’t need approval from the ran department. That I chose after 20 something years of carrying with limited choices.
And in N.J., the cops have purchase their gun thru the same system as everyone else for each gun. Some didn’t get their guns in time for academy training.
So they get to have a 15 round or 17!round with the new laws admendment. Good for them.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Start the thread then.
Acer-m14
20×102mm Vulcan
what law keeps MS13 from guns .. ?? even mac10's if you got the $$$ .. they do .. good drug market ..
what law keeps MS13 from fake permits ??
what law keep MS13 from raping ??
how them Drug laws working ?? USA should be Drug Free by now ..
but some Rights can be infringed on ?? FKIN REALLY .. SCOTUS FKed up .. Scalia Fked up ..
you need a permit for a parade because your shutting down a road ..
have your parade on the sidewalk single file and i bet u won't need one ..
where are the infringes on Voting ?? .. taking a test first ?
Deal with the Criminal acts after the fact ..
what law keeps MS13 from fake permits ??
what law keep MS13 from raping ??
how them Drug laws working ?? USA should be Drug Free by now ..
but some Rights can be infringed on ?? FKIN REALLY .. SCOTUS FKed up .. Scalia Fked up ..
you need a permit for a parade because your shutting down a road ..
have your parade on the sidewalk single file and i bet u won't need one ..
where are the infringes on Voting ?? .. taking a test first ?
Deal with the Criminal acts after the fact ..
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Every coma. Can you believe this horseshit? These two and others have fell for this scam to infringe on rights hook, line, and sinker.