Clinton and the 2nd Amendment ?

[numpty]

She can't introduce law or vote on it if she's elected President, but you can bet your bottom dollar she'll agree to it, push for it, and sign it when it crosses her desk. And this time there won't be a sunset clause.

With as many people covering for her sins right now, I think "pushing for it" might be quite the understatement. I'll bet there will be political lemmings diving over the cliffs, sacrificing their political careers to implement her desires...or else!

If she gets in, find a new hobby and buy a sword or something to defend your families against the evil gun-wielding criminals that could give two s**** about her laws.

A life of crime is going to become very easy and lucrative in a few years.

[numpty]

"Faith in Trump ? In my Opinion I believe he is going to win by a landslide."

No faith in the electorate- after what happened in 2008 I know that the stupidity of the American voter has no limit.

I hope Trump does win by a landslide and we can knock the smirk off the face of the media, the radical left, and the GD rinos.

I hope you are right and I am wrong.

But I fear not.

I agree with everything you said.

And by the way, you are one Bad Ugly Hombre!

[Ugly Hombre]

yep and that's on a good day lol

Like I said I hope to hell I am wrong.

Die is cast, just a few weeks more- we will be down to salvaging the Constitution then probly.

Keep punching brother.!

[Noble Cause]

I always found that argument the government made interesting. They argued Miller's sawed off shotgun would have been protected had it been a commonly used military weapon of the time, even though a sawed off shotgun was also a trench gun as used in WWI. It completely defends our current argument about the AR and AK variants.

The Miller decision was over the legitimacy of a short barreled shotgun. The 1934 NFA does not declare that individuals do not have a right to keep and bear arms. And the Court didn't say that, either. In fact, Miller and his defense didn't even show for the proceedings, nor was Miller even alive when the judgment was passed. And, thirdly, counsel for the U.S. even argued that 2A protects the rights of individuals to own and possess military style weapons (as Njineermike mentioned).

THE PECULIAR STORY OF
UNITED STATES V. MILLER
NYU Journal of Law & Liberty

http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_060964.pdf

and probably colluded with the government to create
the ideal test case. His opinion is peculiar on its face, begging for an
appeal. A memorandum disposition is appropriate when deciding a
routine case, but not when holding a law facially unconstitutional.

And Ragon was the first judge to hold that a federal law violates the
Second Amendment, even disagreeing with a Florida district court
that had dismissed a Second Amendment challenge to the NFA.110

Before he became a judge, Ragon represented the Fifth District
of Arkansas in Congress from 1923 to 1933.111 As a congressman,
he was a vocal advocate of federal gun control. In 1924, Ragon
introduced an unsuccessful bill prohibiting the importation of guns
in violation of state law,112 and vigorously supported another bill
prohibiting the mailing of most pistols, which eventually passed in
1927.113
Basically, Ragon wanted to prohibit firearms used by
criminals, including pistols.114

The End Justifies the Means.


Noble