- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Judge appointed by O'Bama rules illegals can legally carry firearms and ammo
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:06 am to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:06 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
I'll continue arming everyone.
Your govt assistance won’t arm anyone.
1
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:06 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:A right of citizenship. Citizenship is a privilege – at least it should be.
A privilege of citizenship.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:07 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
A privilege of citizenship.
A RIGHT afforded to American Citizens.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:08 am to BCreed1
quote:
A RIGHT afforded to American Citizens.
Hence background checks will be necessary.
This circular argument of yours is fun
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:08 am to momentoftruth87
quote:
Your govt assistance won’t arm anyone.
Arent you going to school on the taxpayer dime/
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:12 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Hence background checks will be necessary.
Off topic and emotional response.
Right now, your best bud SFP has checked out because of the ruling of higher courts on the matter.
I get you and he want to change the constitution to your globalist mind set, but that's not going to happen for a long time.
The 2nd is specific to American Citizens.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:12 am to BCreed1
quote:
Off topic and emotional response.
Absolutely not.
youre advocating for background checks to own firearms. You are pro gun control.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:13 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:They already exist. Where not required – like in private purchase – nothing will change. But our existing laws must be followed. If you're an illegal resident of this country and you attempt to purchase a weapon where a background check takes place, you should be immediately flagged and arrested pending deportation
Hence background checks will be necessary.
This post was edited on 3/25/24 at 10:14 am
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:16 am to Pecker
quote:
Hence background checks will be necessary.
They already exist.
Many many firearms purchased legally without SNs over the years.
The media calls them "ghost guns."
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:17 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
youre advocating for background checks to own firearms.
I have never suggested that.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:17 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Many firearms purchased legally and illegally in a host of ways. Not sure how that changes what I said.
Many many firearms purchased legally without SNs over the years.
The media calls them "ghost guns."
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:17 am to RogerTheShrubber
In United States v. Jimenez-Shilon, the 11th Circuit rejected a Second Amendment challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5)(A), which prohibits firearm use or possession by any “alien” who is “illegally or unlawfully in the United States.” The holding itself is in some ways unremarkable – it joins every other federal circuit court that has considered the issue (now eight in all, according to the majority) in upholding § 922(g)(5) against challenges since Heller.
Judge Newsom relies entirely on a “text and history” approach. The “text” part of this analysis looks at the Second Amendment itself, and in this case, just one word: “people.” The opinion then delves into the question of whether noncitizens or foreigners fell within the Founding era’s public meaning of “the people,”.
Quoting a wide array of Founding-era documents and contemporary scholarship, the opinion concludes that “the people” included many noncitizens in most sections of the Constitution, but not when it is used in the Second Amendment, because the Amendment “codified” pre-existing common law rights, which excluded most noncitizens.
Again... you are applying protected rights of the American CITIZEN to illegals... That weakens the Constitution and higher courts have ruled many times on this.
Judge Newsom relies entirely on a “text and history” approach. The “text” part of this analysis looks at the Second Amendment itself, and in this case, just one word: “people.” The opinion then delves into the question of whether noncitizens or foreigners fell within the Founding era’s public meaning of “the people,”.
Quoting a wide array of Founding-era documents and contemporary scholarship, the opinion concludes that “the people” included many noncitizens in most sections of the Constitution, but not when it is used in the Second Amendment, because the Amendment “codified” pre-existing common law rights, which excluded most noncitizens.
Again... you are applying protected rights of the American CITIZEN to illegals... That weakens the Constitution and higher courts have ruled many times on this.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:17 am to Night Vision
Is entering into the country illegally a misdemeanor or felony?
ETA: first offense misdemeanor, multiple times can raise to level of a felony.
If we just enforced immigration laws, i wouldnt give a shite if “illegals” could carry.
ETA: first offense misdemeanor, multiple times can raise to level of a felony.
If we just enforced immigration laws, i wouldnt give a shite if “illegals” could carry.
This post was edited on 3/25/24 at 10:21 am
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:19 am to BCreed1
quote:
. That weakens the Constitution and higher courts have ruled many times on this.
So, the 2A was really not intended for standing up to tyrannical government. its just a privilege allowed deer hunters and range enthusiasts.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:19 am to Pecker
quote:
Many firearms purchased legally and illegally in a host of ways.
What are the laws that prevent illegals from owning them?
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:20 am to RogerTheShrubber
Probably the law that deals with ppl coming here ILLEGALLY. They’re not supposed to be here yet you idiots are advocating for them.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:21 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:Background checks already exist. Where not required – like in private purchase – nothing will change. But our existing laws must be followed. If you're an illegal resident of this country and you attempt to purchase a weapon where a background check takes place, you should be immediately flagged and arrested pending deportation
What are the laws that prevent illegals from owning them?
This post was edited on 3/25/24 at 10:22 am
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:21 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
So, the 2A was really not intended for standing up to tyrannical government.
Sure it is. That does not change that the 2nd does not include illegals.
Period.
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:22 am to Pecker
quote:
They already exist.
They do?
Where?
If Manuel bought an 80% lower in 2019, what laws prevent that?
Posted on 3/25/24 at 10:23 am to RogerTheShrubber
Background checks already exist. Please re-read
Page 17 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News