9th Circuit rules individuals have no right to bear arms

[bwood]

great post draky...

this must be the only sane judge on the notorious ninth...

((Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski urged his colleagues to rehear the case with a panel of 11 judges, arguing that without individual Second Amendment protections, the government could ban the public's only recourse against tyranny.

"The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed, where the government refuses to stand for re-election and silences those who protest, where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees," Kozinski wrote in papers released Tuesday.))

finally, one has the balls to stand up and state what the
second amendment is truly about...

it aint about hunting, or target practice, or any other
cause put forward to appease the liberal antigun nuts...

diane feinstein has a concealed carry permit by the way...

it would be nice if some of the patriot act naysayers posted
up here...

 

[p0ink]

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU ELECT LIBERALS/DEMOCRATS!!

they appoint these activist judges, who make their own laws through the bench, not through the legitimate legislative route.

you think those in washington are the greatest threat to freedom? think again. it's these fucking judges who ake their own ideas 'law of the land', instead of doing their job - INTERPRETING the law.

god, i am so sick of that fucking court. even though it will be turned over, it just pisses me off to no end.

 

[manny78]

Wait till the day your country turns into another "Canada"....

 

[ajtomasi]

Holy Shit! Can we still bear legs?

 

[jackangel]

9th circuit? is that the one which routinely hands down (widely considered) ridiculous rulings which are overturned and laughed at later on?

 

[p0ink]

9th circuit? is that the one which routinely hands down (widely considered) ridiculous rulings which are overturned and laughed at later on?

they have a HUGE percentage of their rulings being overturned.

there is no way this will hold up.

 

[manny78]

the framers were referring to the right for state militias to be formed, not individual rights. you had to bring your own gun then...

yes the National Guard, created in 1903 ....lol over 100 years after.....

 

[ariolanine]

the framers were referring to the right for state militias to be formed, not individual rights. you had to bring your own gun then...

Am. II
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.

they used "the people" to refer to groups, states, etc; and "a person" when speaking of an individuals right....

as in:
Am. I ...the right of the people peaceably to assemble..
Am. IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons...and the persons or things to be seized
Am V. No person shall be held to answer for a capital...

Wrong. I'd say why, but if you have a brain you'll know.

 

[manny78]

they were all volunteer malitias before that.

an armed citizen is a "volunteer" by definition.

 

[AustinTX]

yes the National Guard, created in 1903 ....lol over 100 years after.....

they were all volunteer malitias before that.