Re: If true then all Joe Biden needs to do is point out in the Constitution where he gets the delegated power to limit

On 11/30/22 11:46 AM, nickname unavailable wrote:
> On every date, #ReamMeUpTheAssSnotty, brain-damaged fucktard who rode 
> his scooter into a tree while not wearing a helmet, stupidly bawled and 
> lied:
> 
>> On 11/30/22 10:36 AM, Paul Jackson wrote:
>>> On 11/30/2022 6:30 AM, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>>>> scooter lied:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Michael A Terrell" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> On 11/29/2022 6:25 AM, Scout wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Klaus  Schadenfreude" <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote in
>>>>>>> message news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 25 Nov 2022 10:15:42 -0800, Rudy "Shitbag" Canoza
>>>>>>>> <"because_\\shitbag\\_was_taken"@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Arms" means "weapons," of any kind.  Right-wingnuts in the USA
>>>>>>>>> insist -
>>>>>>>>> incorrectly, of course - that the second amendment, which
>>>>>>>>> addresses the "right to keep and bear arms," means *any* arms
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Wrong,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, right.  You crazed far-right squat-to-piss girly boy gun-fondling
>>>>>> morons believe, incorrectly, that the right means *any* arms you may
>>>>>> wish to have.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think as an expert in what I believe, I can't help but feel I know
>>>>> that far better than you ever could.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      OK, tell what you believe about
>>>> the constitutionality of gun laws.
>>>
>>> scooter believes any gun laws that restrict his access to guns he 
>>> wishes to have are unconstitutional. 
>>
>> the RIGHT of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
> 
>       Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is
>       *not unlimited*. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases,
>       commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was
>       not a right to keep and carry *any weapon whatsoever* in any
>       manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
>       [emphasis added]
> 
>       DC v Heller, 2008
> 
> You don't have a right to just whatever arms you wish.

Arms and "weapons" are NOT the same. the United States issues arms to 
their employees at the IRS/CBP FBI/CIA Secret Service and more.

Those "arms" all of them... any arms are THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP 
AND BEAR.

I don't see weapons in the RIGHT to keep and bear.

> This is settled.  Even scooter agrees with it.

The Constitution is the ONLY settled thing... and the Constitution was 
amendment by the 2nd amendment to deny the RIGHT/POWER to to make laws 
infringing on that RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE... what ever that RIGHT is.

And by my estimation that RIGHT to KEEP and BEAR ARMS, includes all 
"arms" for which there is no list or specific Government knowledge of 
what is or isn't in the category of "arms".  In FACT the list obviously 
includes all the arms that the United States has tried to ban as 
"FIREARMS" along with all the ones they call firearms or arms or 
personal protection for their government employees and politicians and 
their private sector FAMILY MEMBERS and "PARTNERS".

But doesn't end with that group of arms, those are simply the obvious 
ones that show *Democrat Policy is unsustainable, self destructive and* 
*contradicting* because they call them "arms" in their legal and 
government documents and then ignore THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND 
BEAR ARMS, and commence to banning or limiting restricting or regulating 
those arms.

It's another obvious contradiction in logic, since there is no delegated 
power to make laws to infringe on that RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE.

Why hasn't Joe Biden told us which arms the United States government 
calls arms in their own attempt to ban them, are NOT arms and can be 
regulated and banned by his delegated Constitutional powers?  I'm all 
ears...

If they have a serial number then the ATF, FBI the rest of government 
describe them as firearms... but as we all know it's THE RIGHT OF THE 
PEOPLE to keep and bear that which is known in reality to be "arms".

SO quickly renaming arms to other categories won't change the fact that 
the United States issued arms to the people that that work for the U.S. 
GOVERNMENT. to use for self defense and protecting the government 
offices and politicians and their families which makes them all arms 
going by the 250 years of precedence set by the government use of arms.

See how changing history and tradition changes you and your life to a 
FAKE existence... will undermine reality.


https://youtu.be/afGz0dzVSIU?t=145

Obama (Marxists) say you will have to change your *traditions* and your 
*history* . But are you still "American" if Obama (Marxists) force you 
to change "who we are by erasing who we were"?  The good the bad or the 
ugly it's all reality, Marxist propaganda isn't reality.

What happens to all those Precedence setting court cases that are no 
longer a precedence when lost to history? What about the Democrats 
Confederacy created to make slave States permanent, or pushing to end 
the Democrats JIM CROW LAWS... that was a Precedence setting case that 
we will have to change?

NO we have Precedence setting cases for a reason... it's so we remember 
and we need to remember that the United States Government has been 
issuing arms to soldiers and Government employees and all those are 
listed as arms and paid for with tax dollars to the Fire-arms 
MANUFACTURERS who make and call them arms.

Yes the AR-15 and M-16 are arms and the IRS and Treasury and Defense 
Departments pay with tax dollars to companies that manufacture firearms 
and sell them as arms, so either they are arms or the TREASURY and the 
Pentagon has been committing fraud by buying illegal weapons and calling 
them arms or the Congress and States ban all those weapons illegally and 
unconstitutionally from THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.



-- 
-Reality Matters-