The Second Amendment only protects gun ownership, it doesn't specify in your home

vegas giants said:

Your case has been presented in a court of law? This is me....laughing out loud.

Click to expand...

you are yet lying again. I guess it sucks to constantly parrot a court decision that you cannot rationally defend

TurtleDude said:

you are yet lying again. I guess it sucks to constantly parrot a court decision that you cannot rationally defend

Click to expand...

Your case has been presented in a court of law? Cite please. Pretty please. LOL

vegas giants said:

Your case has been presented in a court of law? Cite please. Pretty please. LOL

Click to expand...

you're the lawyer arguing wickard, fill this board with your wisdom as why the commerce clause should allow congress such power

TurtleDude said:

you're the lawyer arguing wickard, fill this board with your wisdom as why the commerce clause should allow congress such power

Click to expand...

I asked for a cite please. When has you case been presented? I do love this

vegas giants said:

I asked for a cite please. When has you case been presented? I do love this

Click to expand...

I guess we now know you are incapable of advancing a valid argument in favor of the case that ignored precedent, the text and the original intent. OK I know that all along

TurtleDude said:

I guess we now know you are incapable of advancing a valid argument in favor of the case that ignored precedent, the text and the original intent. OK I know that all along

Click to expand...

Anytime now. A cite please. Is your argument so bad no one has been able to make it in 80 years? Now I just feel bad for you. Lol

vegas giants said:

Anytime now. A cite please. Is your argument so bad no one has been able to make it in 80 years? Now I just feel bad for you. Lol

Click to expand...

this is an example of your oozing dishonesty. You have been edified that the Democrat party had 20 uninterrupted years of appointing federal judges. that mean that there were at least 15 years of democrat dominated courts -at all levels of the federal system, after Wickard-a politically expedient decision that was designed to fluff FDR and his new deal nonsense-. This meant that for 15 or so years after Wickard was passed, all the federal courts would follow it. By the time DDE appointees were able to become the majority in some courts, Wickard was established precedent and the Dems then got another 8 years of appointments meaning it wasn't going to get overturned


you seem to believe that because a decision has not been overturned, that means the reasons for its passage were sound. you either lie or ignore the fact that many supreme court cases were not based on sound legal arguments or precedent but political expedience.

and when you are asked to make an argument in favor of that decision, you engage in childish diversion and refuse to -because it has become obvious you cannot

apdst said:

Grenades aren't firearms. They're explosive devices. Hence owning a grenade launcher isn't illegal, but owning explosive ammunition is.

http://www.gunbroker.com/item/691702230

Click to expand...

That's my point. It says keep and bear arms. It doesn't say keep and bear firearms. Arms includes grenades, among other things. Why are we limiting it to firearms?

RandomPoster71 said:

That's my point. It says keep and bear arms. It doesn't say keep and bear firearms. Arms includes grenades, among other things. Why are we limiting it to firearms?

Click to expand...

Right and it isn't illegal own a grenade launcher. It's illegal to own explosive ammunition for the grenade launcher.