- Messages
- 18,744
- Reactions
- 45,457
Has prohibition ever worked?
You mean for instance, at creating a black market, making a bunch of derelicts rich, and driving up violent crime? Yeah, works great.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Has prohibition ever worked?
At what point does the populace go from "I am doing the best I can to be a law abiding citizen" to "random acts of non-compliance" to " I WILL NOT COMPLY!" ?????????
Which is now majority conservative, thanks to Trump!Now it goes to the 9th circus
So a 2:1 decision?Callahan(George W) is the lady with the glasses on the left, Lee(Trump) is the male judge on the right, Lynn(Clinton)
Man, I hope you're right.
Lest we forget recent Trump appointee Lawrence Van Dyke, to the 9th circuit: IDPA member, AR shooter and defender of the 2A.
National - Trump adds IDPA shooter to 9th Circuit Court of Appeals
Van Dyke. At the top of page 51 of his judiciary committee questionnaire he describes his IDPA membership. First IDPA member on a court of appeals?www.northwestfirearms.com
I got itOh great.... Now the mags will need to comply with some measurement in commie units like millimeters and/or be required to fit in some sort of box to be constitutional.
IDPA requirements...
Not quite, but hopefully soon! The best info I could find shows Dems. hold a 3-seat majority with 16 Dem-appointed judges, vs. 13 Rep-appointees.Which is now majority conservative, thanks to Trump!
It matters whether it's being heard by a three judge panel or the whole court. Looks like it's a 3 judge panel, and that panel is 2:1 Republican appointed (meaning hopefully conservative).Not quite, but hopefully soon! The best info I could find shows Dems. hold a 3-seat majority with 16 Dem-appointed judges, vs. 13 Rep-appointees.
OK, yes, just sounded to me like cigars was referring to the whole court. I also mentioned above the 2:1 ratio in our favor in the present case. Fingers crossed.It matters whether it's being heard by a three judge panel or the whole court. Looks like it's a 3 judge panel, and that panel is 2:1 Republican appointed (meaning hopefully conservative).
Most importantly, if they rule against the ban, what will they say about Benitez's reasoning. It matters when they get to the USSC.OK, yes, just sounded to me like cigars was referring to the whole court. I also mentioned above the 2:1 ratio in our favor in the present case. Fingers crossed.