Judges topple gun restrictions as courts chart an uncertain path forward
Source: Minnesota Reformer
This is long but worth it.
Just take it a paragraph at a time.
12 Likes
Read it and groaned. This is nothing more than a thinly veiled screed about how the Supreme Court ruined everything by muddying up the pure water of eliminating firearms. It highlights the wonderful work of the anti-gun organizations and their plucky efforts to keep fighting the good fight, and itâs all for our own goodâweâre just too dumb to understand it.
Manipulative dreck.
6 Likes
And another thing as far as the courts, they seem to ignore or not look at the meaning, âShall Not Be Infringedâ. much less challenge it or put it in use.
6 Likes
I believe they call that âhorse and buggy thinkingâ.
6 Likes
It highlights what we are up against.
All these anti-2A entities and their agendas that we need to counted with our pro-2A agendas, why we need to at least remain actively involved communicating with our respective representatives about our own concerns.
This is a much better ensuing term for advancing our cause than the expiring one was.
Now is the time to get more involved countering all the DEI Democratic Enforced Idiocy, and get some tangible results, like abolishing their unconstitutional restrictions on our 2A rights, RTK&BAâŠ
6 Likes
It highlights what we are up against.
All these anti-2A entities and their agendas that we need to counted with our pro-2A agendas, why we need to at least remain actively involved communicating with our respective representatives about our own concerns.
This is a much better ensuing term for advancing our cause than the expiring one was.
Now is the time to get more involved countering all the DEI Democratic Enforced Idiocy, and get some tangible results, like abolishing their unconstitutional restrictions on our 2A rights, RTK&BAâŠ
3 Likes
They seem to ignore or not look at the meaning, âWell regulated". The 2A could be interpreted to mean anything the court wants it to mean, this Supreme Court has shown us that we shouldnât rely on established precedent.
2 Likes
Over the past two years, federal courts have struck down bans on assault weapons in trend-setting blue states such as California and Illinois.
To clarify in California, these same judges ruled the same way prior to Bruen. The 9th Circuit overturned them. Then post-Bruen, the 9th Circuit sent the cases back to the lower courts and got a heavier dose of what these judges already said the first time. Now these cases are again hung up in the 9th Circuit where theyâre doing everything they can to slow the process down, delay, delay, delay, and at some point rule against us. I havenât seen anything thatâs actually changed just yet.
Actually, in two of the ongoing cases, theyâve been transferred to an ultra liberal activist judge who Biden just appointed. Ultimately, similar to the liberal 9th Circuit, she isnât going to give 
about Bruen and will rule against us with ignorance and weasel words. Itâs what they do. Itâs why they were given a black robe in the first place.
4 Likes
(That is the big bone of contention with blue states like NY that choose to ignore 2A putting their restrictions on it.
If it were not for states like that we would have no need to pass a National Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act.
But we do!)
2 Likes
âWell regulatedâ means well equipped and well trained. Iâve often argued that the govât should be supplying me with ammo and subsidizing my training and range expenses. It wasnât too far in the past that the CMP was established to make sure citizens were training with current military issue rifles. The govât actually viewed it as a bad thing that so many citizens didnât have proper marksmanship skills and had no idea how to operate an M1 Garand or M1 Carbine. Times have definitely changed.
4 Likes
What, in your opinion, should the courts be doing with respect to the Second Amendment to make sure the militia is well regulated?
2 Likes
This oughtta be good. 
6 Likes