Jump to content
Xchief30

Which new SC Justice will help with our gun laws ??

Recommended Posts

Ummm...I don't think we disagree. I think Hardiman would have been better and I stated that. I just can't see how gnashing of teeth/rending of garments over Kavanaugh is helpful. It could have been better... but it could have been much worse. At least he's keeping to the list... can you imagine if he were winging this on his own??? [emoji20]

 

He isn't keeping to the list. He is keeping to the updated swamp added Bush-Clinton Cabal List.

 

 

Get out your tinfoil hats. Kavanaugh helped in covering up Vince Foster murder. He is a card carrying Cabal Swamp member.

 

 

 https://heavy.com/news/2018/07/brett-kavanaugh-vince-foster-vincent-death/

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Did you ever think that maybe you aren’t getting responses because no one here is in the “Trump can do no wrong” crowd. You keep addressing your query to some phantom you made up in your mind.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

No because there is no argument about Bennett, he is an Anti. So what is anyone to say that is defending the Kavanaugh pick?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Darrenf said:


Did you ever think that maybe you aren’t getting responses because no one here is in the “Trump can do no wrong” crowd. You keep addressing your query to some phantom you made up in your mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

That's an interesting point! I tend to agree with you,. @capt14k---More so than people adoring Trump, I hear a lot more saying, "Well, at least it's not Hillary in there". I think most people have their eyes open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MartyZ said:

Yes, I did, licensing and training before for concealed carry purposes. I see no issue with that, isn't that what most shall issue states do?

So most states do something unconstitutional,  that makes it constitutional?  

You don't see anything wrong with that?

Heres a hint, once there is a license, there is no right, only a privledge.

 

Maybe there should be a license before a person can procreate.  Poor parenting is tje leading cause of Americas woes afterall.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
No because there is no argument about Bennett, he is an Anti. So what is anyone to say that is defending the Kavanaugh pick?
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk



I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you are saying here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  I’m sorry, I don’t understand what you are saying here.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

 

 It was really addressed to 3 people. That they defended Trump's Kavanaugh pick and got bent out of shape of any criticism of Trump, but they ignore his Bennett pick for the 9th. Bennett is an Anti. The 9th needs strong Pro 2A. Hopefully he isn't confirmed but the Justice Committee and Cloture vote last night doesn't look good. He will likely be confirmed to the 9th. My point about those 3 is why aren't they defending his pick of Bennet too. 

 

 

Then again the more I think about it I guess it is because not as many are as Pro 2A as they claim to be. Thank you for helping me see even more of the light. Too many NJ firearms owners simply are not Pro 2A. Thus why it is not worth fighting the fight here. I know my decision to leave is the right one.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, PeteF said:

So most states do something unconstitutional,  that makes it constitutional?  

You don't see anything wrong with that?

Heres a hint, once there is a license, there is no right, only a privledge.

 

Maybe there should be a license before a person can procreate.  Poor parenting is tje leading cause of Americas woes afterall.

Just like driving...

9 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

Ummm...I don't think we disagree. I think Hardiman would have been better and I stated that. I just can't see how gnashing of teeth/rending of garments over Kavanaugh is helpful. It could have been better... but it could have been much worse. At least he's keeping to the list... can you imagine if he were winging this on his own??? :(

...helpful....

No, we don't do that here.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

That is a good point, state should not mandate training. And if they do it should only be basic gun safety and not something that will cost an arm and a leg.

It should cost an individual nothing.  It should be part of a public school education.  Is there anyone that could not benefit from knowing how to safely deal with a firearm?  I'm talking Eddy Eagle, not Urban Operator.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PeteF said:

It should cost an individual nothing.  It should be part of a public school education.  Is there anyone that could not benefit from knowing how to safely deal with a firearm?  I'm talking Eddy Eagle, not Urban Operator.

that's what I said, basic gun safety, just like the NRA first pistol class, which is free. But in public schools? I don't think so. Anyone learning gun safety in today's public schools will most definitely wind up shooting themselves in the foot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MartyZ said:

that's what I said, basic gun safety, just like the NRA first pistol class, which is free. But in public schools? I don't think so. Anyone learning gun safety in today's public schools will most definitely wind up shooting themselves in the foot.

Why?  I was required to learn how to type, cook, sew, patch drywall, and do woodworking to get out of 8th grade.  How would learning how to safely approach a fire arm be a problem? How likely are blue training guns to go off and injure someone.  You dont need to fire a gun to understand how to be safe around one.  Once safety is instilled all else can be learned on your own.  

By this I mean voluntarily seek training when you can.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, PeteF said:

Why?  I was required to learn how to type, cook, sew, patch drywall, and do woodworking to get out of 8th grade.  How would learning how to safely approach a fire arm be a problem? How likely are blue training guns to go off and injure someone.  You dont need to fire a gun to understand how to be safe around one.  Once safety is instilled all else can be learned on your own.  

By this I mean voluntarily seek training when you can.

I was referring not to the students not being able to learn, but those who would be teaching them by today's standards. That it why I said in TODAY'S public schools. It was a jab at our current public school system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Zeke said:

GOA on board

https://gunowners.org/statealert71018.htm

how can all these groups be wrong?

i guess Hillary would have been better 

LOL, your point is well-taken! And I'm glad to see that particular write-up! I consider GOA to be a bit more vigilant and hardline than the NRA. Again, though Hardiman may have been even better... this is not a loss!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

LOL, your point is well-taken! And I'm glad to see that particular write-up! I consider GOA to be a bit more vigilant and hardline than the NRA. Again, though Hardiman may have been even better... this is not a loss!

In an effort to understand a few here

https://act.everytown.org/sign/Tell-Your-Senators-Vote-No-On-Trumps-2018-scotus-pick/?source=etno_ETHomepage&utm_source=et_n_&utm_medium=_o&utm_campaign=ETHomepage&refcode=ETHomepage&_ga=2.192956909.1901947500.1531243828-1665815685.1531243828

the gun grabbers are also not happy. Lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MartyZ said:

I was referring not to the students not being able to learn, but those who would be teaching them by today's standards. That it why I said in TODAY'S public schools. It was a jab at our current public school system.

Caught that on a follow on read of your comment.  Im a little slow today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL, your point is well-taken! And I'm glad to see that particular write-up! I consider GOA to be a bit more vigilant and hardline than the NRA. Again, though Hardiman may have been even better... this is not a loss!
Its a lateral move.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Nah, more a 1/2 step to the right. Considering the playing field that's huge.
I don't think so, but I also don't view Kennedy as a Liberal. He was was part of the Heller majority and he was part of the majority in Obamacare case that last minute i.e. after Roberts was blackmailed that became the minority.

I also don't completely agree with Heller.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

 
Nah, more a 1/2 step to the right. Considering the playing field that's huge.
I don't think so, but I also don't view Kennedy as a Liberal. He was was part of the Heller majority and he was part of the majority in Obamacare case that last minute i.e. after Roberts was blackmailed that became the minority.

I also don't completely agree with Heller.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too wanted Hardiman but it's not like he was going to wave a magic wand and put a full auto in everyone's hands. That seat is just one vote and can only vote on what makes Its way there. I feel confident K would vote the same as H on any 2A cases. When the Court actually takes in a 2A case we will know there is a comfort zone to move forward on restoring our rights. That will be the defining moment.....As long as the opposition is pissed and the pro gun groups are happy with him I think we will be ok. time to move on and remember how awful it could've been.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I too wanted Hardiman but it's not like he was going to wave a magic wand and put a full auto in everyone's hands. That seat is just one vote and can only vote on what makes Its way there. I feel confident K would vote the same as H on any 2A cases. When the Court actually takes in a 2A case we will know there is a comfort zone to move forward on restoring our rights. That will be the defining moment.....As long as the opposition is pissed and the pro gun groups are happy with him I think we will be ok. time to move on and remember how awful it could've been.


I disagree, if Cruz were to run against Trump in a primary I certainly would vote for Cruz.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rather than all the in-fighting........which is gonna cost us...and has cost us in the past.....how about we just take it for what it is? we have doubts on his 2a stance, but he seems pretty strong on the constitution. that parts good. it would almost dictate that if a good 2a case comes up, he'd vote in favor of 2a.

 lets get on with our lives, knowing that there's not some ultra-liberal shitballer being appointed, which would screw things up for your kids and your grandkids.  it seems likely that trump will get at least 1 more chance to appoint a justice. hopefully that one will be the ultra-2a friendly justice we want. in the meantime, we've at least gottan a justice we need. by that i mean one that'll actually go by the law, rather than making up his own laws to justify his interpretations of the constitution.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting part is Breyer and Ginsburg may have screwed the dems by not retiring when Obama was president.  At 80 and 85 respectively no actuarial would write them an insurance policy.  Imagine a generation of 7-2 majority?  I'd like it, not sure everyone would. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rob0115 said:

Interesting part is Breyer and Ginsburg may have screwed the dems by not retiring when Obama was president.  At 80 and 85 respectively no actuarial would write them an insurance policy.  Imagine a generation of 7-2 majority?  I'd like, not sure everyone would. 

I read something about this last week. Nobody thought HRC was gonna loose. Bigly

The plan was for 3 -4 liberal judges. If HRC had won, Ginsburg would have retired right after Scalia replacement was confirmed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, siderman said:

I too wanted Hardiman but it's not like he was going to wave a magic wand and put a full auto in everyone's hands. That seat is just one vote and can only vote on what makes Its way there. I feel confident K would vote the same as H on any 2A cases. When the Court actually takes in a 2A case we will know there is a comfort zone to move forward on restoring our rights. That will be the defining moment.....As long as the opposition is pissed and the pro gun groups are happy with him I think we will be ok. time to move on and remember how awful it could've been.

Imagine that Hillary would be making her second, maybe third SC appointment right now.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
rather than all the in-fighting........which is gonna cost us...and has cost us in the past.....how about we just take it for what it is? we have doubts on his 2a stance, but he seems pretty strong on the constitution. that parts good. it would almost dictate that if a good 2a case comes up, he'd vote in favor of 2a.
 lets get on with our lives, knowing that there's not some ultra-liberal shitballer being appointed, which would screw things up for your kids and your grandkids.  it seems likely that trump will get at least 1 more chance to appoint a justice. hopefully that one will be the ultra-2a friendly justice we want. in the meantime, we've at least gottan a justice we need. by that i mean one that'll actually go by the law, rather than making up his own laws to justify his interpretations of the constitution.
Maybe.


He covered up Vince Foster murder for Clinton so I don't have much faith in him.


I'm hoping Cruz gets next pick, but I know that is a super long shot.


For now it's at least a couple more years of the same. Unless of course Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed. Nah highly unlikely, because the Clintons owe him.

Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bob2222 said:

Imagine that Hillary would be making her second, maybe third SC appointment right now.

What a nightmare. 

5 hours ago, Zeke said:

I read something about this last week. Nobody thought HRC was gonna loose. Bigly

The plan was for 3 -4 liberal judges. If HRC had won, Ginsburg would have retired right after Scalia replacement was confirmed.

Ginsburg is going to retire whether she likes it or not.  She should have been censured when she commented on Trump’s presidential run.  If she and Breyer drift off the court will be set for the next 40 years. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...