re: Remember that guy that got caught on camera with a gun in his waist at a wrestling tourn…

quote:

---

It was a toy. How are they going to prove it wasn't.

---

I agree, without an admission on his part they can't prove it was a firearm.

quote:

---

For all you guys who think you're frickin' Perry Mason

---

He entered the gym after starting a school track race.



- Perry Mason

The crowd in that pic.

quote:

---

So, they shall be "infringed"... a little,

---

As opposed to the concrete "shall not". I'm not sure why that's such a difficult concept for you.

quote:

---

For all you guys who think you're frickin' Perry Mason and have already beat the case by saying "it was a toy" ... that's still in violation of the statute he's accused of violating:

"possession of deadly weapon or dangerous ordnance OR of object indistinguishable from firearm in school safety zone, which is a fifth-degree felony."

---

You take all that and shove it up your arse.

Here's an opinion you should listen to youtube

quote:

---

Nuclear weapons, surface-to-air missiles, anti-tank weapons?

---

Certainly hand guns.

quote:

---

and understand that the intent of the writers was no infringement; however, they were not omnipotent in what the future would bring in weaponry.

---

You have no idea what their INTENT was. And this bullshite argument on various laws and judges and other idiots wanting to CHANGE what the laws is by saying that wasn't the intent is BS.

The law is what was written down. If the intent was to ban tampons and instead they wrote the 2nd amendment then that wouldn't ban tampons even if it was their intent.

If you don't like the second amendment AND the intent was something else. I don't care. Change the law if you don't like it. Intent is not relevant or important.

Intent is just another tool used by the communist just like "living breathing document" is used to change the law without actually changing the law.

quote:

---

I am an originalist (at least in my own mind) and understand that the intent of the writers was no infringement; however, they were not omnipotent in what the future would bring in weaponry. So, some level of logic and intelligence has to be applied to even this Amendment - same could be said for the 14th and the allowance of unlimited birth citizenship. We, as Americans, have to ensure that reasonable justices remain on the benches.

---

Its almost like there is a way to fix it that isnt having judges make shite up that doesnt exist.

Its called an amendment to the constitution.

If you dont want people to have nukes then states and congress can amend the constitution to say no nukes.

They never did that shite.

quote:

---

Actually, yes, yes I do

---

Actually no, no you don't. And the point is the law is the law and not the intent YOU think was behind the law.