CA overturns ar ban | Poal: Say what you want.

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.

Click here to see all the comments (10).

[–] • 1 pt

(edited )

unconstitutional jew gun law overturned

WHAT THE FUCK I want some of what clown world is on.

e;

Good (the AR15) for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

This is hilarious as fuck. US v Miller is the precise noncase (read up on it, Miller didn't even show up, he died and his estate didn't send a lawyer, so it was literally just the government side versus no one) in which ALL unconstitutional gun laws are based from. The (((GCA))) the (((NFA))) etc. This is fucking weird as fuck this decision quoted Miller as a reason to shrink (((gun control))).

ee: Ooop. Here it is;

The banned “assault weapons” are not bazookas, howitzers, or machineguns.

SHALL

NOT

BE

INFRINGED

This is just kikes playing both sides.

eee:

Those arms are dangerous and solely useful for military purposes.

The following line contains the "restriction" that is by definition an infringement. There is no such thing as a military weapon or a weapon that is solely for military purpose. That's a jewish lie. There are THINGS that have USES. Period. End of discussion. Full-fucking-stop. "arms" is just a name for a particular type of "thing". "use" is neither used nor defined nor qualified in any part of the 2nd. Except. You know. The whole "possess" if you really want to get abstract and consider mere possession as use, which sure but that further bolsters my wall of text and rips apart this kike decision. (the decision is correct, the means are kiked)

eeee: He does go on to eviscerate the (((media))) and it's lies about muh scary rifle. But again: both sides; every issue.

eeeee:

There is only one policy enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Guns and ammunition in the hands of criminals, tyrants and terrorists are dangerous

Care to share where between "Shall not be infringed" any of that lies? I can't fucking find it. All I see is SHALL NOT FUCKING BE INFRINGED YOU DUPLICITOUS KIKE.

eeeeee:

To give full life to the core right of self-defense, every law-abiding responsible individual citizen has a constitutionally protected...

NO YOU FAGGOT. EVERY CITIZEN HAS a constitutionally protected right. The bit "law-abiding" is jewish as fuck.

oh you bounced a check when you were 16 years old HAHAHA STUPID FUCKING GOY YOU'RE A FELON NOW FOREVER

responsible

Sure reads like subjective (((red-flag))) kikery to me.

>unconstitutional jew gun law overturned WHAT THE FUCK I want some of what clown world is on. e; >Good (the AR15) for both home and battle, the AR-15 is the kind of versatile gun that lies at the intersection of the kinds of firearms protected under District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) and United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). >United States v Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939) This is hilarious as fuck. US v Miller is the precise noncase (read up on it, Miller didn't even show up, he died and his estate didn't send a lawyer, so it was literally just the government side versus no one) in which ALL unconstitutional gun laws are based from. The (((GCA))) the (((NFA))) etc. This is fucking weird as fuck this decision quoted Miller as a reason to shrink (((gun control))). ee: Ooop. Here it is; >The banned “assault weapons” are not bazookas, howitzers, or machineguns. ##### SHALL ##### NOT ##### BE ##### INFRINGED This is just kikes playing both sides. eee: >Those arms are dangerous and solely useful for military purposes. The following line contains the "restriction" that is by definition an infringement. There is no such thing as a military weapon or a weapon that is solely for military purpose. That's a jewish lie. There are THINGS that have USES. Period. End of discussion. Full-fucking-stop. "arms" is just a name for a particular type of "thing". "use" is neither used nor defined nor qualified in any part of the 2nd. Except. You know. The whole "possess" if you really want to get abstract and consider mere possession as use, which sure but that further bolsters my wall of text and rips apart this kike decision. (the decision is correct, the means are kiked) eeee: He does go on to eviscerate the (((media))) and it's lies about muh scary rifle. But again: both sides; every issue. eeeee: >There is only one policy enshrined in the Bill of Rights. Guns and ammunition in the hands of criminals, tyrants and terrorists are dangerous Care to share where between "Shall not be infringed" any of that lies? I can't fucking find it. All I see is SHALL NOT FUCKING BE INFRINGED YOU DUPLICITOUS KIKE. eeeeee: >To give full life to the core right of self-defense, every law-abiding responsible individual citizen has a constitutionally protected... NO YOU FAGGOT. EVERY CITIZEN HAS a constitutionally protected right. The bit "law-abiding" is jewish as fuck. >oh you bounced a check when you were 16 years old >HAHAHA STUPID FUCKING GOY YOU'RE A FELON NOW FOREVER >responsible Sure reads like subjective (((red-flag))) kikery to me.

link

[–] • 2 pts

Im still waiting for someone to point out "felon" and "mentally ill" in the constitution. Funny because I think in 1776 They had criminals, and crazys (Witches?) Yet DIDNT restrict them from guns.

parent
link

[–] • 1 pt

This is a garbage ruling solely due to the opinion that is based on (((law))) and not based on the constitution. This will be used to destroy the 2nd.

parent
link