First Gun Confiscation Killing Reported in Maryland

Old Trapper said:
LOL, ever hear of actually reading the article so you know what you are talking about? It is the GOP that is setting up these "Red Flag" laws, and they want it on a federal level:

"Months ago, the GOP admitted what they were planning. One conservative Congressman — Florida Rep. Francis Rooney — went on record and admitted that “some freedoms are going to have to be given up.”
Click to expand...

Yes I read the article, Fuckstick.
No law which is unconstitutional has merit.
 
reagansghost said:
they have a perfect right to request this nutbag's guns be confiscated, and the police have a perfect right to do so

what part of that eludes you?
Click to expand...

A court order issued upon the claim of one person, no third party input, and no opportunity for the respondent (?) to rebut is not a lawful adjudication of anything. The way such an action should work is that the concerned party files a petition, the judge reviews it and grants a hearing, the subject gets served with a writ to appear, (then lawyers up) goes to court, argues and is then adjudged based on evidence and response, then either the petition is granted or rejected....

Me telling you that Joe is nuts is not anything more than gossip and innuendo.

Everyone knows that you do not have to answer the door for anyone, right?


There is no justification for initiating a swat raid at 5:17 a.m. based on someones “concern”.
 
Old Trapper said:
But it does not prevent the State from restricting those "arms". You do understand that the term "arms" includes missiles, bazookas, hand grenades, etc., right?

And the Second does not address an individuals right to bear arms. It is addressing the right of a member of a militia.
Click to expand...

That isn't what the SCOTUS ruled.
 
Old Trapper said:
But it does not prevent the State from restricting those "arms". You do understand that the term "arms" includes missiles, bazookas, hand grenades, etc., right?

And the Second does not address an individuals right to bear arms. It is addressing the right of a member of a militia.
Click to expand...

You are either supremely ignorant, or a liar. Arms refers to small arms, so no, it does not include "missiles, bazookas, hand grenades, etc."

If the Second Amendment is not referring to individuals, what is meant by "the right of the people"? Does it say "the right of the militia"? No, no it doesn't. You sir are a moron.

BTW, what does any of this gobbledygook have to do with this case?
 
volsrock said:
A court order issued upon the claim of one person, no third party input, and no opportunity for the respondent (?) to rebut is not a lawful adjudication of anything. The way such an action should work is that the concerned party files a petition, the judge reviews it and grants a hearing, the subject gets served with a writ to appear, (then lawyers up) goes to court, argues and is then adjudged based on evidence and response, then either the petition is granted or rejected....

Me telling you that Joe is nuts is not anything more than gossip and innuendo.

Everyone knows that you do not have to answer the door for anyone, right?


There is no justification for initiating a swat raid at 5:17 a.m. based on someones “concern”.
Click to expand...

total horseshit

I thought you gun nuts claim guns don't kill people, mentally ill people do and we need to identify them!

well, a family member identified one.........why are you whining now rambo?
 
reagansghost said:
total horseshit

I thought you gun nuts claim guns don't kill people, mentally ill people do and we need to identify them!

well, a family member identified one.........why are you whining now rambo?
Click to expand...

Was he deemed mentally ill? By who?
You pathetic libtards do wish to disarm the public, don't you?
 
volsrock said:
A court order issued upon the claim of one person, no third party input, and no opportunity for the respondent (?) to rebut is not a lawful adjudication of anything. The way such an action should work is that the concerned party files a petition, the judge reviews it and grants a hearing, the subject gets served with a writ to appear, (then lawyers up) goes to court, argues and is then adjudged based on evidence and response, then either the petition is granted or rejected....

Me telling you that Joe is nuts is not anything more than gossip and innuendo.

Everyone knows that you do not have to answer the door for anyone, right?


There is no justification for initiating a swat raid at 5:17 a.m. based on someones “concern”.
Click to expand...

Back in 1996 my soon to be ex-wife filed a complaint with the Sheriff that she was afraid I was going to kill her, and her parents. A SWAT team raided my house, took my weapons, and I had to go to Court to get them back.

That was 20 years ago in Iowa. So, I agree with your assessment.
 
reagansghost said:
total horseshit

I thought you gun nuts claim guns don't kill people, mentally ill people do and we need to identify them!

well, a family member identified one.........why are you whining now rambo?
Click to expand...

Wrong.
He was accused not identified.
Stupid or lying, just as bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top