Bronze Supporter
- Messages
- 37,292
- Reactions
- 128,676
You actually know nothing about me...You Think you do ...but you are wrong.
Last time STOP QUOTING ME
Andy
HA HA... I just quoted you!
I'm just stirring the pot...
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.
You actually know nothing about me...You Think you do ...but you are wrong.
Last time STOP QUOTING ME
Andy
Couldnt find info. Do know there exist training/inert versions and very likely laser/similar devices.I did not know that. Can they fly with weapons
Don't make me break out my big.........Spoon....HA HA... I just quoted you!
I'm just stirring the pot...
The BOR is supposed to limit the U.S. govt from infringing on them
Again, SCOTUS have repeatedly affirmed that the first 10 Amendments, and all following Amendments, are not unlimited Rights"who is a law abiding adult"
FWIW, that is not in the 2nd Amendment. Everyone who wants a gun, should get one. Yes even ex-felons.
You either don't understand our natural born rights, or, don't actually support them. The second amendment does not have a "law abiding" clause. It has nothing. It is that way by design; it's too easy to criminalize innocent people. For no reason, what so ever, should someones 2nd Amendment protected right be removed. Ever.
What does "shall not" mean when there is no exception listed with it? When you add an exception after the fact, does "shall not" have meaning anymore? What was it there for in the first place?Seeing some 2A Absolutists in this thread gives me hope about for this site. Thank you, gentlemen.
I'm not a big fan of gangs of any kind, but it sounds to me like the judge should have thrown this out.However, Section 46.15(b)(6)(A)(B) says the previous section mentioned (Section 46.02) does not apply to a person who is carrying an LTC issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, provided they are carrying correctly. Glass said Vaden was carrying the gun correctly.
Young, in this case, wrote that a license to carry should not apply here and Vaden should not ride with a gun. After speaking with 6 News legal expert Liz Mitchell, she said it is not unusual for a judge to subjectively interpret laws in this situation.
I'm not a big fan of gangs of any kind, but it sounds to me like the judge should have thrown this out.
Yeah, well you're talking about a state where your Ruger 10/22 is legally designated a "semiautomatic assault rifle", so...If it applies to a Bandido that has no criminal record, that had a LTC, then it can apply to anybody. What if they applied it to any member of NWFA because they don't like NWFA?
IIRC, WA state has a similar law.
Judge was probably thinking about re-election rather than law.I'm not a big fan of gangs of any kind, but it sounds to me like the judge should have thrown this out.
I remember when I was young and thought that judges were mostly impartial. Simpler times.Judge was probably thinking about re-election rather than law.
I've never heard it put better. Thank you!