ADVERTISEMENT

Shooting at West Omaha Super Target

Ted Cruz is having none-of-it and Beto was too dumb to realize he was running in Texas.

Did you vote for either?

And this tree hugging liberal is a gun owner also, but probably wouldn't own one if everyone else didn't have one...at this point, I'd rather have one and not need it, than need one and not have it
 
Did you vote for either?
Nope. Never voted for Trump or Biden either. 2016, I voted for Gary Johnson. 2020, I opted out of voting for President and mostly voted in local elections. In the case of Cruz vs Beto, I voted for Neal Dikeman (iirc).

And this tree hugging liberal is a gun owner also, but probably wouldn't own one if everyone else didn't have one...at this point, I'd rather have one and not need it, than need one and not have it
I feel the exact same way. I haven't hunted in years (I get my deer and hog meat from friends and co-workers). All the long guns I own are confiscations from family members and my bedside gun is for self-defense only.

I'm at the point in my life where I wish we lived in a gun-free utopia.
 
Did you vote for either?







And this tree hugging liberal is a gun owner also, but probably wouldn't own one if everyone else didn't have one...at this point, I'd rather have one and not need it, than need one and not have it
Careful there... you might be making a very compelling a case for gun ownership.
 
Gonna need pics to know.

j/k

Call your congressperson and urge them to support gun reform.
I'm going to go on record and say, I honestly believe the next major change in gun laws is the 1934 NFA is going to fall in the courts and be rules unconstitutional.
I actually have a bet, (bottle of pop) with a serious gun nut I work with that before the end of 2033, I will be able to walk into a gun store and walk out with a fully auto weapon no permits required, same as would have happened in 1933.

As unpopular and insane as that sounds, that is the direction it is going to go.

By all means call your Congressperson all you want, within 10 yeas it will become crystal clear the only possible way for meaningful and lasting gun control is to repeal the second amendment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BelemNole
Those are old numbers due to the democrats wanting every child dead we have passed China.
William Bonney Confirmed. No further engagement required.

stand-down-get-back.gif
 
Last edited:
I'm going to go on record and say, I honestly believe the next major change in gun laws is the 1934 NFA is going to fall in the courts and be rules unconstitutional.
I actually have a bet, (bottle of pop) with a serious gun nut I work with that before the end of 2033, I will be able to walk into a gun store and walk out with a fully auto weapon no permits required, same as would have happened in 1933.

As unpopular and insane as that sounds, that is the direction it is going to go.

By all means call your Congressperson all you want, within 10 yeas it will become crystal clear the only possible way for meaningful and lasting gun control is to repeal the second amendment.
That's really a sad scenario.
 
I'm going to go on record and say, I honestly believe the next major change in gun laws is the 1934 NFA is going to fall in the courts and be rules unconstitutional.
I actually have a bet, (bottle of pop) with a serious gun nut I work with that before the end of 2033, I will be able to walk into a gun store and walk out with a fully auto weapon no permits required, same as would have happened in 1933.

As unpopular and insane as that sounds, that is the direction it is going to go.

By all means call your Congressperson all you want, within 10 yeas it will become crystal clear the only possible way for meaningful and lasting gun control is to repeal the second amendment.
Or we could always interpret that dependent clause that starts the 2A as, well, you know, a dependent clause.

But that seems to be beyond the pale.
 
within 10 yeas it will become crystal clear the only possible way for meaningful and lasting gun control is to repeal the second amendment.
Why not just actually "follow" it.

The words "well-regulated" are clearly part of the text. If Justices refuse to uphold common sense regulation, consistent with the actual text of the Amendment, we need new Justices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BelemNole
Why not just actually "follow" it.

The words "well-regulated" are clearly part of the text. If Justices refuse to uphold common sense regulation, consistent with the actual text of the Amendment, we need new Justices.
JFC Joe, I'm not jumping on the ****ing merry-go-round with you but this has been more than answered by the SCOTUS. The late Justice, John Paul Stevens understood this and the rest of us need to also. Repeal the Second! It's the only way.
 
JFC Joe, I'm not jumping on the ****ing merry-go-round with you but this has been more than answered by the SCOTUS.
No; it has never been addressed by SCOTUS. They have sidestepped it, or improperly pretended that clause doesn't exist when regulatory laws are passed.
 
No; it has never been addressed by SCOTUS. They have sidestepped it, or improperly pretended that clause doesn't exist when regulatory laws are passed.
It's O-V-E-R over Joe, you L-O-S-T lost. It was addressed and answered in Heller. Pretend it wasn't all you want. Waste all of your time on it you want. You're not wasting mine.

Rehashing something you lost really makes me think you enjoy losing.

There's only one way out of this. Repeal the Second.
 
It was addressed and answered in Heller.
Where?


"well regulated" isn't mentioned, anywhere.

No one is arguing that you have to be "part of a militia"; THAT was decided.

But there was NO stipulation in that decision on requirements for any "training" or "regulation" for people who want to own firearms, and requiring that "militia-equivalent" training to own one.

Militias were "well trained" in the day the 2nd Amendment was written. Since we no longer have them made up of citizen-militias (our paid police, state patrol, national guard are our militias today), there's no reason anyone who owns a weapon should not be "well trained" and "well regulated" in its safe use. Nor that there cannot be laws in place to require it.

Heller doesn't touch on this topic at all. Cite the parts of the decision it if you think it does. Cornell law doesn't even use those words in its summary. Even states that "licensing" was not addressed in the decision, which is what "regulation" and "training" can be tied to.
 
Nobody was injured other than the alleged shooter

Not true NC...a few ladies were separated from their purses (credit cards) for a few hours thanks to this member of our well regulated militia. If you've ever been to Target and have seen the clientele, you'd know credit card separation - even for a few hours - is worse than any "injury" you're referencing.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT