The gun debate is always a hot button topic especially when it comes to hunters, outdoor enthusiasts, and people living off the grid.
It seems that this topic just got a little bit hotter due to a landmark decision by The U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals who have decided that the AR-15 is not protected by the Second Amendment of the United States Consitution.
Let's take a look at what they said and how they came to this major decision.
Next Page »
Pages: 1 2
When Trump became President, did you get back all of your guns that Obama took away?
Gregory Bryant I’d like to see where it says any and all firearms aren’t protected in the constitution. The 2nd Amendment is quite clear “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. . arms – weapons considered collectivelyarms – weapons considered collectively. So the Constitution specifically states there shall be no infringement by the government limiting what weapons we may have or use.
this is clearly more bullshit.the 2nd amendment does not decern what type of arms, nor was the ar-15 around when it was written.molon labe motherfuckers
Funny, the media isn’t crying about the loss of rights over this, but because they get excluded from a press conference the world as we know it shall end. The hypocrisy of the left knows no bounds.
They purpose of an assault rifle is to assault or defend against the same type of weapon. This is the purpose of the 2nd amendment. We have the right to defend ourselves against ALL enemies, foreign AND domestic. With the state of our country, right now, I believe I would like to have the ability to defend myself against anyone, even a federal militia that shouldn’t exist according to our founding fathers.
My point is that the AR-15 and other rifles like it are meant to allow us the ability to defend ourselves against tyranny and history tells us that it is a necessity which is why we Jane the second ammendment. It wasn’t written for home protection, hunting or the purpose of law enforcement it was written to enable the general populace the RIGHT to overthrow a governing body that is out of control. Why do you think the government wants this one out?
Liberal courts denying the constitution and existing Supreme Court rulings! What a JOKE!
There was nothing in the Constitution prohibiting any “weapon” before. A main battle tank is a weapon. A Cobra helicopter is a weapon, a nuclear warhead is a weapon. These are also weapons regularly used by the military. The language is vague because the weapons have changed since the Constitution was written. There was nothing then preventing a private citizen from owning a 6 or 10 pounder (cannon), if they could find one. So by the language of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and many state constitutions, there are no restrictions except for unelected bureaucratic regulators, which are even weaker than a lawless executive order.
Look up the definition of ‘arms’ idiot. The 2nd Amendment is quite clear “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. . arms – weapons considered collectively arms – weapons considered collectively. So the Constitution specifically states there shall be no infringement by the government limiting what weapons we may have or use.
So, by this stupidity, since the internet is specifically mentioned in the 1st Amendment does that mean it isn’t covered as freedom of speech?
Yes, it doesn’t say a specific gun, can or can’t be used!
It is worded for all availability of weapons. You can’t separate one!!!
A SIMPLE EXPLANATION FOR A SIMPLE MIND!!
Those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither.
I literally took the words from the original comment and asked the poster to elaborate, calm it down warriors
JP Kruchten So you believe that you should own nuclear arms? I hope you’re joking…I’m not sure – I AM a stupid libtard.
Fake news
I personally believe a person should be able to own and carry any nonchemical weapon that’s nonexplosive
Well just dont have a mental breakdown or allow some mentally ill take your weapons. Lock them up and keep your bullets far away, besides ARs might not be a good investment for the future. Buy something that will improve your life like an education for you or your kids.
Yeah? well that tell us you’re no outdoorsman. A squirrel can chew chunks out of you before you can blink. Raccoons are fearsome and dangerous animals, not cute and cuddly like on the cartoons. A deer will come at you during the rut and try to mate with you, and deer like rough sex. So…GO ahead out there with that theory. YOU’LL be screaming for mommy very quickly…
Since an AR-15 is not a military weapon this decision holds no water at all.
Matthew Fitch most European socialist countries don’t have the minorities we have in America. Socioeconomic issues do not play a major role in violent behavior, race is the major factor. If socioeconomic issues were a factor, then the murder/crime rate would be equal in poor white America as it is in the inner cities and it’s not. You have 6% of the population (black males) committing 50% of violent crime and murders. This is a proven fact. If you eliminate that 50%, America is the safest and most heavily armed country in the world. You see Europes crime rates increasing as they receive more minoritie refugees entering their countries and the previously homogenous society is changing. Another classic example is South Africa where the predominantly white cities are crime free while the predominantly black rural areas are crime ridden cesspools. Another problem is the inclusion of firearm related suicidesand justified homicides in the statistics, these should not be included in any reasonable gun argument. The sad truth, if you want to stop most gun crime in America, is to ban gun ownership from blacks and liberals (Democrats).
JP Kruchten So prior to the black influx in urban areas of the North, cities like New York and Chicago were crime-free? “Al Capone” sounds like a weird name for a black guy. The Purple Gang? Were they black, or possibly 100% Jewish? In the mid-1800s, there weren’t the Crips and the Bloods – there were the Dead Rabbits, the Bowery Boys, the Plug Uglies, the True Blue Americans – all of which were white. Violent crimes have always plagued America’s inner-cities, regardless of the race of the people committing the crimes.
That’s my point. They made term fluid and also have documented written opinions that they meant civilians should have weapons sufficient to defend against weapons brought against them
Danny Lankford
Roger Mathers I keep hearing liberals say ” calm down there not taking your guns “, and then some freak unconstitutional court creates wording out of thin air , that can later be used by another freak unelected entity to ban guns !!!! They are coming for our guns , because the Democrat party is run completely by leftist revolutionaries , and the last step in making you accept an unelected state is taking away the means to defend your self !!! MOLON LABE !!!
They will never stop trying. But they will never find a hole in the Constitution t hey can push it through. Their “assault rifle” ban keeps coming up over and over. And over and over it gets shot down. The founders wisely constructed our laws for just such$#%&!@*heads as these. Name one weapon they have gotten out of and kept out of the hands of citizens? None…
It also says by an organized militia. Just saying dont pick and choose the constitution like many do the bible. I am pro gun just not pro ignorant arguments. Everyone in this thread left out by an organized militia.
Becauze your guns were taken when during the last administration? You fucking twit. All idiots like you do is drive up orices for arms and ammunition everytime you uneducated assholes freak out. Noone is taking your guns hasnt happened and wont.
Hahahaha yep this tey and come take mone movement is laughable if yhe govt wants your guns they will be gone or you will be dead. Good luck with your ar against tanks and storm troopers dipshit.
What do people still fail to understand about AR’s? It’s a fucking semi auto gun, no different than a Remington 750 or similar hunting rifles. So what makes the terrible AR any different? The fact that it LOOKS like it’s full- auto brother, but that’s fucking it. This bullshit has gone on too long
Militia: “a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.” The “civil population” being civilians who keep and bare arms. The term “well regulated” simply refers to proper training and discipline. It has nothing to do with what type of firearm is used by anyone in the militia.
It doesn’t matter.
The ignorance runs DEEEEEP. Furthermore, the .223 round was federally designed to INJURE not KILL. By injuring I soldier 1 would take 1-2 more soldiers out I combat to attend to the injuries. (In theory)These rifles have been around since nam but now they’re an issue.. smh
“You kind of look like the unibomber, so we’re going to throw you in jail for the rest of your life”
“You kind of look like the unibomber, so we’re going to throw you in jail for the rest of your life.”
Ha ha bull$#%&!@* Come and take them.
Well$#%&!@*the court
Unconstitutional legislation. Null and void.
Funny 2nd Amendment talks about “arms”. Does not say arms, except AR-15
Squirrel hunting with an AR-15? Go ahead and turn in your Man Card.
Because*
Jared Theis “hasn’t happened and won’t”? You mean like the 94 AWB? Or the 34 NFA? Or the 68 GCA? Or the 86 Hughes amendment? Or the import bans?
…and that’s just on a federal level.
Gorsuch needs to be confirmed NOW, so this can be struck down in the SCOTUS.
Activist leftist judges, plain and simple.
Lmao another gimic to sell more guns.
I love my ar15, having said that the attempts to drive prices back up have become very transparent and sad.
Breaking… Major decision by Americans, these judges need to be replaced with competent constitutionalist’s asap!
One has to laugh
The second says ARMS……..
That would be ALL arms folks…….
Jared Theis you make yourself look ignorant on these posts.
1. A well regulated militia is made up of the people as a whole, particularly able bodied men of a certain age.
2. If it was only meant for the militia, then why does it say “THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE”? Shouldn’t it say “the right of the militia”?
3. If you don’t know what you’re talking about, get educated. The second amendment doesn’t say “by an organized militia” anywhere. I believe that you have to actually read the US Constitution before you try to be a constitutional scholar.
I don’t see where it says
The right to keep and bear arms that pass judicial muster
Or Congressional aproval
Or presidential smell test.
It says
ARMS and shall not be infringed.
It’s REALLY straight forward ON PURPOSE
I have the right to effective arms regardless of what some self important clown in a robe says.
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve read. Most AR15s are an exact mil-spec copy of the M4, with the exception of the sear. They are not a toy and they are no less durable than an M16.
They don’t need to find a hole in the constitution, they just bypass it completely and infringe on the people’s right to bear arms by banning certain weapons… on a federal level. 94-04: assault weapons ban
34-present: National Firearms act
68-present: Gun Control Act
86-present: Firearm Owners Protection Act (Hughes amendment)
Umm…The Tomcat was retired years ago, we haven’t had bazookas in ages, Apaches don’t fire Tomahawk cruise missiles…so…Lol.
No, Jared Theis, it does not say “an organized militia”.
And Kevin Martina, well regulated, in the vernacular of the 1790s, simply meant “working properly”.
The Constitution makes the case that civilians do, in fact, posses the right to own military weapons.
It resides in one of the enumerated powers of Congress; the ability to issue a letter of marque.
It allows Congress to issue to privateers permission to attack and seize enemy vessels.
Kind of hard to fight battleships without a battleship.