accused
That's never NOT been the case. Should have stated "convicted" and he'd still be correct. Shall Not Be Infringed leaves no grounds for infringement.
“The Second Amendment has always allowed laws restricting the gun rights of groups viewed by legislatures as posing a public-safety risk, including those accused but not convicted of wrongdoing,” the prosecution wrote.
Exceedingly false; The (((GCA))) of 1968 is what (((legislated))) that jew law into place. Merely 5 years before (((Roe))). The Bruen decision if applied correctly would allow convicted felons to own guns, as it should.
>accused
That's never NOT been the case. Should have stated "convicted" and he'd still be correct. Shall Not Be Infringed leaves no grounds for infringement.
>“The Second Amendment has always allowed laws restricting the gun rights of groups viewed by legislatures as posing a public-safety risk, including those accused but not convicted of wrongdoing,” the prosecution wrote.
Exceedingly false;
The (((GCA))) of 1968 is what (((legislated))) that jew law into place. Merely 5 years before (((Roe))). The Bruen decision if applied correctly would allow convicted felons to own guns, as it should.
(post is archived)