Another liberal moron that doesn't know the meaning of the word "INFRINGE".
BREAKING: Federal Judge Rules AR-15′s Are "Dangerous and Unusual," Not Protected by 2nd Amendment
In what looks to be a terrible ruling for Maryland gun owners a federal judge has essentially ruled that guns that were regulated by the state of Maryland last year, including AR-15 and AK style rifles (as well as other magazine fed, semi-auto rifles with certain features), "fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual arms," according to a 47 page opinion by U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake
READ MORE....
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/court-cases/breaking-federal-judge-rules-ar-15s-are-dangerous-and-unusual-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment/ (http://gunssavelives.net/blog/court-cases/breaking-federal-judge-rules-ar-15s-are-dangerous-and-unusual-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment/)
I hope a higher court makes an example out of this idiot lib!
Quote from: Solar on August 14, 2014, 06:23:08 PM
I hope a higher court makes an example out of this idiot lib!
Oh the higher court will but you know that you can't embarrass a liberal. They have no shame.
Quote from: Bronx on August 14, 2014, 06:35:57 PM
Oh the higher court will but you know that you can't embarrass a liberal. They have no shame.
True, it will only elevate his station in Dim circles. He's probably shooting for a seat on the Marxists SCOTUS if one should open up.
Quote from: Bronx on August 14, 2014, 06:21:14 PM
Another liberal moron that doesn't know the meaning of the word "INFRINGE".
BREAKING: Federal Judge Rules AR-15′s Are "Dangerous and Unusual," Not Protected by 2nd Amendment
In what looks to be a terrible ruling for Maryland gun owners a federal judge has essentially ruled that guns that were regulated by the state of Maryland last year, including AR-15 and AK style rifles (as well as other magazine fed, semi-auto rifles with certain features), "fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual arms," according to a 47 page opinion by U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake
READ MORE....
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/court-cases/breaking-federal-judge-rules-ar-15s-are-dangerous-and-unusual-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment/ (http://gunssavelives.net/blog/court-cases/breaking-federal-judge-rules-ar-15s-are-dangerous-and-unusual-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment/)
Hmm... Are you sure that's not Sci Fi Fan.
Stupidity...ALL firearms are dangerous....hey knucklehead....define "Unusual", I would say that Armalites and AK's in this modern age are "usual", the military has them an many members and ex members are trained on them and familiar with them.
Question for the court: what make a firearm "unusual"?
Quote from: Solar on August 14, 2014, 06:41:24 PM
True, it will only elevate his station in Dim circles. He's probably shooting for a seat on the Marxists SCOTUS if one should open up.
Um, he's a girl. Catherine C. Blake is a girl.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1103.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg463%2Ftbone0106%2FJudge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg&hash=3c92a512b556c6b754fcd6b51b9ef40d955d3417) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/tbone0106/media/Judge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg.html)
Quote from: Billy's bayonet on August 14, 2014, 06:53:48 PM
Stupidity...ALL firearms are dangerous....hey knucklehead....define "Unusual", I would say that Armalites and AK's in this modern age are "usual", the military has them an many members and ex members are trained on them and familiar with them.
Question for the court: what make a firearm "unusual"?
Excellent question! "Unusual" firearms these days are single-shots, muzzle-loaders, black powder burners... wait, wait. Unusual firearms these days are EXACTLY the firearms the American revolutionaries used around 1780. I believe at that time they could have been described as "assault weapons."
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 14, 2014, 08:38:58 PM
Excellent question! "Unusual" firearms these days are single-shots, muzzle-loaders, black powder burners... wait, wait. Unusual firearms these days are EXACTLY the firearms the American revolutionaries used around 1780. I believe at that time they could have been described as "assault weapons."
So my homemade tomahawk is safe for now. :smile:
Incremental changes. I hate where this country is headed. I remember when we were the land of the free. Going to have to change the anthem soon.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 14, 2014, 08:34:34 PM
Um, he's a girl. Catherine C. Blake is a girl.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1103.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg463%2Ftbone0106%2FJudge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg&hash=3c92a512b556c6b754fcd6b51b9ef40d955d3417) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/tbone0106/media/Judge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg.html)
:lol:
Are you sure? Looks like an aged MSNBC has-been. :biggrin:
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 14, 2014, 08:34:34 PM
Um, he's a girl. Catherine C. Blake is a girl.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1103.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg463%2Ftbone0106%2FJudge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg&hash=3c92a512b556c6b754fcd6b51b9ef40d955d3417) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/tbone0106/media/Judge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg.html)
Biologically speaking.
I wasn't aware the words "unusual and dangerous" appeared anywhere in the 2nd Amendment. I guess they've worn out that "regulated militia" argument. But, they could be buried somewhere in that General Welfare clause where the Libs find so many hidden "rights".
Quote from: Bronx on August 14, 2014, 06:21:14 PM
Another liberal moron that doesn't know the meaning of the word "INFRINGE".
BREAKING: Federal Judge Rules AR-15′s Are "Dangerous and Unusual," Not Protected by 2nd Amendment
In what looks to be a terrible ruling for Maryland gun owners a federal judge has essentially ruled that guns that were regulated by the state of Maryland last year, including AR-15 and AK style rifles (as well as other magazine fed, semi-auto rifles with certain features), "fall outside Second Amendment protection as dangerous and unusual arms," according to a 47 page opinion by U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake
READ MORE....
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/court-cases/breaking-federal-judge-rules-ar-15s-are-dangerous-and-unusual-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment/ (http://gunssavelives.net/blog/court-cases/breaking-federal-judge-rules-ar-15s-are-dangerous-and-unusual-not-protected-by-2nd-amendment/)
So this judge thinks, that an Ar-15 or Ak-47 is the same as oh, I don't know, an ICBM tipped with a nuclear weapon?
Somehow, for some reason, I don't think this ruling will stand upon further judicial review. :biggrin:
But this yet again illustrates that elections, particularly Presidential elections have consequences.
There are several of these liberal morons on the bench now, thanks to his lowliness the Obammy's election to the Presidency of these states united.
Quote from: walkstall on August 14, 2014, 09:14:50 PM
So my homemade tomahawk is safe for now. :smile:
My iron frying pan is suspect as it has been known to ring a few bells. Well, I ain't getting rid of it.
:angry:
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 14, 2014, 08:34:34 PM
Um, he's a girl. Catherine C. Blake is a girl.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1103.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg463%2Ftbone0106%2FJudge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg&hash=3c92a512b556c6b754fcd6b51b9ef40d955d3417) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/tbone0106/media/Judge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg.html)
Looks like a classic "Pat".
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 15, 2014, 04:43:33 AM
Looks like a classic "Pat".
One has to wonder, has this justice even ever seen these guns? Have they seen them fired? Have they shot them themselves?
I mean come on, shouldn't they actually KNOW something about the weapon, before making a ruling as to whether or not it's an "unusual" weapon or not?
Seems to me that to make a ruling without actually seeing one, without either seeing one or firing one yourself is irresponsible.
To say nothing of a complete lack of impartiality, and judicial ethics, these lib justices engage in.
When they sit on the bench making rulings from on high, about something they know not the first thing about, and which is based upon furthering one political agenda or another.
This is a serious problem within the judiciary today.
Far too many justices think they are there to impose upon us all, their own political world view. Far too many think they are there to create laws.
Rather than making rulings based upon nothing but the FACTS (evidence) and the existent law. Leaving the creation of laws, to those whom we the people have elected to do so.
Namely the legislature.
Quote from: PeterR on August 14, 2014, 09:53:10 PM
I wasn't aware the words "unusual and dangerous" appeared anywhere in the 2nd Amendment. I guess they've worn out that "regulated militia" argument. But, they could be buried somewhere in that General Welfare clause where the Libs find so many hidden "rights".
Stupid liberals attaching emotional trigger words to inanimate objects, as if the object itself is somehow sentient.
They've managed to label Co2 as a pollutant, why not give guns rights not to be owned, they have "feelings" too, ya know.
Oh, did I mention just how much I despise libs? :glare:
Quote from: keyboarder on August 15, 2014, 03:23:39 AM
My iron frying pan is suspect as it has been known to ring a few bells. Well, I ain't getting rid of it.
:angry:
...hmmm .... well, my popcorn popper has been known to launch a few unpopped kernels now and then...those little tiny projectiles can do some random bodily harm. Nahh...not getting rid of it either!
Quote from: suzziY on August 15, 2014, 06:17:34 AM
...hmmm .... well, my popcorn popper has been known to launch a few unpopped kernels now and then...those little tiny projectiles can do some random bodily harm. Nahh...not getting rid of it either!
I just had my waffle maker sighted in.
Quote from: daidalos on August 15, 2014, 05:06:02 AM
One has to wonder, has this justice even ever seen these guns? Have they seen them fired? Have they shot them themselves?
Of course the answer is a blanket "no".
Progressive judges are dedicated to a group of simple beliefs, and will shade every action and decision toward these things:
-Gun control (criminalization of guns)
-No fault, no limits abortion
-Eradication of religions / churches
-Maximum state welfare / legislation
-Maximum taxes / redistribution
-Minimum self reliance / liberty
-Eradication of the military for national purposes, but a militarized internal security apparatus
I mean, it's all there in marx, alinsky, machiavelli, cloward-piven. But they've all internalized each and every tenet as beliefs to live by.
They've also been very savvy; rule each and every time to help one or more of these beliefs take hold. Incremental, long-term.
The sad thing is that the progressives have created a hive mentality where 50-100 million people are doing this daily. While conservatives haven't even gotten started developing a response. Only been happening for 35 years already. Hope we get our shit together soon.
So, let me get this straight. Grenades are now being used by the Mexican drug cartel along the border and yet "they" rule that AR-15's are dangerous and unusual. Silly me ...liberal logic always seems to befuddle me.
Simple equations -
Cartel grenades against Americans = good
Guns that protect Americans = bad
If you don't know that this is Obama's basic world view, you've been asleep for 7 years.
AR-15 are "Dangerous and Unusual"? Does this womyn realize it fires a .223 cartridge? Didn't they used to give those to children? You know, to familiarize them with weapons. As another poster used to say: "Gun control gives every 100LB woman, the right to fist fight with a 220LB rapist". Feel free to explain why feminists, think every place with more than one male, is a seething pool of rapists; but they're against woman having any means to protect themselves.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 14, 2014, 08:34:34 PM
Um, he's a girl. Catherine C. Blake is a girl.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1103.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fg463%2Ftbone0106%2FJudge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg&hash=3c92a512b556c6b754fcd6b51b9ef40d955d3417) (http://s1103.photobucket.com/user/tbone0106/media/Judge_Catherine_C_Blake_zpsf564252b.jpg.html)
Why do all libs look alike, or completely look like what I expect them to?
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 15, 2014, 04:43:33 AM
Looks like a classic "Pat".
:tounge: :laugh:
Yeah, or maybe a "Lynn" or a "Kim" or a "Jackie."
This judge should be hauled before the justice department for dereliction
of duty. The US Constitution is not hers to change. Let's hope this case
goes before the high court as a challenge to her fitness to serve
as a federal judge,
Personally, I prefer the Remington 750 or any M-14 if I could find one.
223 Rem is a good round for that model and 10 mags are standard.
I've never been a big AR-15 fan, but those who are report the later
models are scary accurate.
Quote from: keyboarder on August 15, 2014, 03:23:39 AM
My iron frying pan is suspect as it has been known to ring a few bells. Well, I ain't getting rid of it.
:angry:
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi800.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fyy285%2Fbronx1957%2Flaughing-chimp_51581.gif&hash=9f74688bfe4bbf64b789da56d36f5a52510340d4)
Quote from: AndyJackson on August 15, 2014, 06:31:55 AM
Of course the answer is a blanket "no".
Progressive judges are dedicated to a group of simple beliefs, and will shade every action and decision toward these things:
-Gun control (criminalization of guns)
-No fault, no limits abortion
-Eradication of religions / churches
-Maximum state welfare / legislation
-Maximum taxes / redistribution
-Minimum self reliance / liberty
-Eradication of the military for national purposes, but a militarized internal security apparatus
I mean, it's all there in marx, alinsky, machiavelli, cloward-piven. But they've all internalized each and every tenet as beliefs to live by.
They've also been very savvy; rule each and every time to help one or more of these beliefs take hold. Incremental, long-term.
The sad thing is that the progressives have created a hive mentality where 50-100 million people are doing this daily. While conservatives haven't even gotten started developing a response. Only been happening for 35 years already. Hope we get our shit together soon.
That's my point too.
Federal Justices are appointed to the Bench for LIFE just like those at the SCOTUS.
This is done not because we want someone to sit there in that job forever.
But because we want a judge to be free from political considerations and contraints.
Free to make rulings which are based upon nothing more than the law, and the evidence.
It is absolutely unethical and immoral for a judge, especially a federal justice, to issue a ruling which is based upon their own political ideology rather than the facts of the case and the existent relevant law.
IF we had a Congress full of men and women who were there to do their jobs, who were willing to uphold our Constitution and our laws, and not just there to collect a hand-out errr I mean paycheck (as well as other fringe benefits they've voted into existence for themselves) from the taxpayers.
Justices who do issue such rulings based upon nothing but their own political views, would and by rights should, have their rulings voided as well as be impeached and removed from the bench for judicial misconduct.
Oh and btw, I was scalded me today when I just filled the cup and swigged the coffee.
Since my Mr. Coffee doesn't have a warning label to tell me that the coffee may be hot and might burn me.
I will be filing suit presently....to have all coffee makers banned since they are so obviously dangerous. j/k
Don't retreat. Reload.
Quote from: TboneAgain on August 14, 2014, 08:38:58 PM
Excellent question! "Unusual" firearms these days are single-shots, muzzle-loaders, black powder burners... wait, wait. Unusual firearms these days are EXACTLY the firearms the American revolutionaries used around 1780. I believe at that time they could have been described as "assault weapons."
Unusual firearms were back in the day when anything went....ever see those duckfoot triple barrel black powder pistols? How about a cane gun, my friend knuckle duster derringer pistol? now THATS unusual.
You are correctthough, The assault weapon of the day was the Kentucky (or if you are a Pa native like me) the PENNSYLVANIA long rifle which could reach out and heart shoot a foe at 300 yds whereas the British brown bess could MAYBE hit a man sized target at 50 yrds.
But the armalites and AKs have been around since the late fifties not unusual anymore......
Just a question because I really do not understand.
Why it is that a thread, about an issue such as the 2nd Amendment, an amendment which is I would argue vitally important to the freedom of the citizens of our republic. Moved and in the distraction news forum instead of the main forum?
Seems to me that attacks upon those rights of Americans which are fundamentally vital to our freedom are not merely a "distraction" but rather warrant our serious, and deep concern.
Quote from: daidalos on August 15, 2014, 07:55:43 PM
Just a question because I really do not understand.
Why it is that a thread, about an issue such as the 2nd Amendment, an amendment which is I would argue vitally important to the freedom of the citizens of our republic. Moved and in the distraction news forum instead of the main forum?
Seems to me that attacks upon those rights of Americans which are fundamentally vital to our freedom are not merely a "distraction" but rather warrant our serious, and deep concern.
Which thread are you referring to?
Well, I think Federal judges are dangerous and unusual. So there!
Quote from: Charliemyboy on August 16, 2014, 07:59:26 AM
Well, I think Federal judges are dangerous and unusual. So there!
:blink: Say what?
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fmedia.fotki.com%2F1_p%2Crsqktkbttrtbqsgxbqfqsbrwqdbw%2Cvi%2Frkttfwdrwxrbgdsrqf%2F1%2F1595431%2F12754330%2Fdangerous_gun_nut-vi.png&hash=23694a86243074db0859b9942c3e34f1c37d1e1f)
If this judge was consistent in her beliefs, than all media except the hand cranked press, would be considered unusual by the Founding Fathers, and therefore not protected by 1st Amendment.
Quote from: mdgiles on August 16, 2014, 09:00:39 AM
If this judge was consistent in her beliefs, than all media except the hand cranked press, would be considered unusual by the Founding Fathers, and therefore not protected by 1st Amendment.
Hmm... by her way of thinking, woman should stop taking the pill. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Solar on August 15, 2014, 08:22:24 PM
Which thread are you referring to?
I was referring to this one. But, I was mistaken I see. Somehow last night when I asked the q, I got confused and thought I was in the msm kid forum when I saw this thread. Sorry....please continue the discussion. :lol:
Quote from: Bronx on August 15, 2014, 01:54:25 PM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi800.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fyy285%2Fbronx1957%2Flaughing-chimp_51581.gif&hash=9f74688bfe4bbf64b789da56d36f5a52510340d4)
Aha! There's my pal again! :smile: :smile: