Antonyuk v James is dead, denied Cert by libtard Robert's SCOTUS court.

[Old Jalopy]

I'd believe most here who have kids would have raised them to be pro-gun.

Pols are for fishing and strippers.


Remember, being pro2A is for all guns. Cause black guns matter.

 

[Defilade]

"Will not be infringed" must have been removed from the Constitution some how.

 

[Bustedknees]

Many of us did.

The most expedient solution was to GTFONY.

You folks can run, but you can't hide. Every time a federal judge rules in favor of some crazy liberal law it will be drooled on then copied by another liberal in one of your cities. With the great drag of SCOTUS or rulings that don't go our way the knife will be your back in time.

 

[Vicarious]

For the past decade, an estimated 630,000 people have moved from California to Arizona, which averages to about 173 people a day...just saying

that will dick AZ over, new blue state

 

[GOPerfect]

Weren't Trump and Bondi supposed to start making all of this go away back in February? Even going by 30 "working days", that 30 time frame has long since elapsed. The fact is, until we get a top dog who is truly going to make people uphold the oath they took and hold those who don't liable, it's only going to get worse. As mentioned, it's spreading and spreading fast. If you can afford to move, great. But the liberal anti-gun people are doing the same. Look how many states used to be free that are now starting to pass anti-gun laws.

Another fact people may not get is the younger generations (and some older people too) are following the latest cool thing on social media. The cool things are to hate guns and America. Those are the future leaders, so....... Escape will soon be futile.

I am curious for sake if discussion..


What exactly would you like to see Trump and team do?

 

[JRtraderny]

ACB is probably the most liberal one. Out of all right leaning justices.

Yep Trump outdid himself on that one .

 

[JRtraderny]

I am curious for sake if discussion..


What exactly would you like to see Trump and team do?

Handcuffs and lots of them , have the US Marshall's Service put the fear of god in these Constitution hating liberal law makers.

 

[Criticalt]

I am curious for sake if discussion..


What exactly would you like to see Trump and team do?

Make federal laws protecting the 2a. Real laws with real protection.
Federal law Trumps state law where constitutional rights are concerned...pun intended.
Make laws that any infringement on the 2a will be heavily punished with fines and loss of federal aid.
When a gun law is overturned by SCOTUS, it means that a lower court and jurisdiction violated the oath they all swore to uphold.
Can a state make laws that you cannot speak freely? Can a state make a law that a religion cannot be practiced? Can a state make a law allowing home searches without probable cause or a warrant?
No, why not?
Because the constitution protects these rights and the three branches of government are bound to uphold these rights against rouge states.
States have pretty free will over most laws, but they cannot defy these few rules.
Trump is actively allowing this and does have the power, along with congress and the SCOTUS to set it right. My guess is he will not.

 

[Old Jalopy]

I am curious for sake if discussion..


What exactly would you like to see Trump and team do?

Aside from what's stated above. Trump may not be able to just whip up an EO to restore the 2nd Amendment (I believe he can but...), but he can make an EO declaring those in violation of it and those in violation of upholding the oath to uphold and protect the Constitution be held liable and arrest them. This whole thing is being made more complicated than it really is. I would like them to stop pissing on us and trying to say it's raining.

 

[GOPerfect]

Make federal laws protecting the 2a. Real laws with real protection.
Federal law Trumps state law where constitutional rights are concerned...pun intended.
Make laws that any infringement on the 2a will be heavily punished with fines and loss of federal aid.
When a gun law is overturned by SCOTUS, it means that a lower court and jurisdiction violated the oath they all swore to uphold.
Can a state make laws that you cannot speak freely? Can a state make a law that a religion cannot be practiced? Can a state make a law allowing home searches without probable cause or a warrant?
No, why not?
Because the constitution protects these rights and the three branches of government are bound to uphold these rights against rouge states.
States have pretty free will over most laws, but they cannot defy these few rules.
Trump is actively allowing this and does have the power, along with congress and the SCOTUS to set it right. My guess is he will not.

Thank you for the response/. You already know that I do not disagree with your thoughts and Ideas on this.

However, I am going to take the next few lines to point out stuff that we already know....

The President does not make laws. Not sure if I would want them to have that kind of power.

Taking away Federal monies.... I have always loved this idea. Hurt them where it hurts the most.

I do not think we can go after Judges that interpret the Constitution incorrectly. I really do not know. Great if we could.

"Can a state make laws that you cannot speak freely? Can a state make a law that a religion cannot be practiced? Can a state make a law allowing home searches without probable cause or a warrant?"

No they cannot. Not sure why it is allowed and tolerated with the 2A. Not sure exactly the powers of the President in this type of situation.

The power is in SCOTUS, not the Office of the President. Now, the AG may have more power to go in and break some balls. Again, I am not wise enough to understand all of the powers of these offices.

The President does not have the power to override the decisions of SCOTUS, only Congress passing laws have that ability. I blame the House and the Senate more than the President.

I go back to a statement that I made in another Thread, maybe it is time for President Trump to consult some of us here on these kinds of matters.

The anti 2A crowd in the US has had 200 years to rip apart, and get away with, stripping the 2A.

I am NOT making any excuses for Trump in not addressing this issue, he could definitely be more involved in what is going on in regards to our Rights being stripped.

 

[GOPerfect]

Handcuffs and lots of them , have the US Marshall's Service put the fear of god in these Constitution hating liberal law makers.

I do not see an issue with this idea, what exact charge would we cuff them for?

 

[JRtraderny]

I do not see an issue with this idea, what exact charge would we cuff them for?

Crimes against the constitution, treason , anything we can make up just like they did to try and railroad DJT .

 

[Defilade]

that will dick AZ over, new blue state

No. Those are Conservatives getting out of dodge!

 

[GOPerfect]

Crimes against the constitution, treason , anything we can make up just like they did to try and railroad DJT .

I am okay with this.... as long as the charges can and will stick.

 

[Cooolone]

I disagree with the concept that the Progressive Liberal mentality will take hold and permeate the countryside...

The proof is in the pudding where as the recent sway and shift, now counting 29 States that have recognized Constitutional, or Permitless Carry for it's residents, ie, citizens. And the number grows... Hopefully, my new home State of NC will be the 30th! We shall see!...

All in all, there's some 9 States, infected with the Left, the Progressive mentality, that may never, will in all probability never ever sway in that direction. But when you look deeply I to those locales, and their political make up, how those States treat it's citizens, you'll see that it's so much about simply controlling the masses than any other thing. They don't want you to have those freedoms and by golly, they'll go to whatever lengths to prevent you from having them, period! They prefer that you believe and exist in a vacuum where they provide the air you breathe and that you're thankful for it! Don't forget to ask before the inhaling your next breath because it's entirely by permission!...

Man... That's it, that's all I got to say, lol

 

[SomeSoldier]

You can't vote your country out of communism.

 

[spat]

You folks can run, but you can't hide. Every time a federal judge rules in favor of some crazy liberal law it will be drooled on then copied by another liberal in one of your cities. With the great drag of SCOTUS or rulings that don't go our way the knife will be your back in time.

AZ does not follow the pattern of other states.

Phoenix is our largest city, and it went for Trump.

Tucson is more "old hippies" and votes accordingly, but still not like a Rochester, Buffalo, or Syracuse.

You're not wrong that national pain will be felt here, but it's amazing how much less painful it is to live with *only* the national problems.

 

[IrishMick]

GOPerfect, I'm not even sure the legislature can write laws that can override a Constitutional Amendment or a SCOTUS ruling on constitutionality. At least in theory. Could Congress whip up a bill allowing for some quartering of troops in your home, or allowing some forms of slavery? I would say absolutely not nor would the People stand for that. In fact, with the exception of the 18th amendment (an aberration of and affront to the constitution), All amendments are focused on expanding the freedoms of the People and/or restrict the government in interfering in the peoples liberties, especially the first ten of the BOR. I know we both believe that the Constitution was developed to provide the People with as free a society as possible to flourish in. In theory if our governmental system was functioning properly (well regulated if you will), If Congress passed a law or there was an Executive order that abrogated the rights of the People, The SCOTUS would immediately review it and quash that law as unconstitutional immediately or at least halt it injunctively until it was fully reviewed. Any law or EO that even hints at restricting the People and their rights and freedoms (most laws do) would be handled this way if things were functioning properly. However the different (and unconstitutional) levels of scrutiny are so bastardized and abused that I fear even SCOTUS fails to see how this is destroying our republic. Interest Balancing Tests are for laws like speed limits, stop lights, and community harmony. So that someone (even though it does constrain their individual freedom a bit) isn't driving 80mph thru the neighborhood, blowing thru the intersection, and waking the town with open headers on their car. I think Thomas had it right in Bruen and the standards for determining how to adjudicate our basic enumerated rights. The highest levels of burden should be on the government to prove that a law doesn't infringe on the freedoms and rights of the people. He also had it right when he said that the 2A has and is being treated as a second class right. Can you imagine if any other right was treated like the second amendment? There are only two amendments that should have never been put into the Constitution the 16th and the 18th. Taking the fruits of someones labor through taxation is an affront to the beliefs of our founding fathers and the 18th is the only amendment that directly infringed on the citizens by outlawing alcohol for consumption, the only amendment that had no freedom for the people at any level. Sorry for the long post. I think you and I are aligned on things, I just think that even if Congress passes a law that clearly infringes on an enumerated right it is void immediately, a non starter if you will. Furthermore they have NO business even trying.

 

[GOPerfect]

GOPerfect, I'm not even sure the legislature can write laws that can override a Constitutional Amendment or a SCOTUS ruling on constitutionality. At least in theory. Could Congress whip up a bill allowing for some quartering of troops in your home, or allowing some forms of slavery? I would say absolutely not nor would the People stand for that. In fact, with the exception of the 18th amendment (an aberration of and affront to the constitution), All amendments are focused on expanding the freedoms of the People and/or restrict the government in interfering in the peoples liberties, especially the first ten of the BOR. I know we both believe that the Constitution was developed to provide the People with as free a society as possible to flourish in. In theory if our governmental system was functioning properly (well regulated if you will), If Congress passed a law or there was an Executive order that abrogated the rights of the People, The SCOTUS would immediately review it and quash that law as unconstitutional immediately or at least halt it injunctively until it was fully reviewed. Any law or EO that even hints at restricting the People and their rights and freedoms (most laws do) would be handled this way if things were functioning properly. However the different (and unconstitutional) levels of scrutiny are so bastardized and abused that I fear even SCOTUS fails to see how this is destroying our republic. Interest Balancing Tests are for laws like speed limits, stop lights, and community harmony. So that someone (even though it does constrain their individual freedom a bit) isn't driving 80mph thru the neighborhood, blowing thru the intersection, and waking the town with open headers on their car. I think Thomas had it right in Bruen and the standards for determining how to adjudicate our basic enumerated rights. The highest levels of burden should be on the government to prove that a law doesn't infringe on the freedoms and rights of the people. He also had it right when he said that the 2A has and is being treated as a second class right. Can you imagine if any other right was treated like the second amendment? There are only two amendments that should have never been put into the Constitution the 16th and the 18th. Taking the fruits of someones labor through taxation is an affront to the beliefs of our founding fathers and the 18th is the only amendment that directly infringed on the citizens by outlawing alcohol for consumption, the only amendment that had no freedom for the people at any level. Sorry for the long post. I think you and I are aligned on things, I just think that even if Congress passes a law that clearly infringes on an enumerated right it is void immediately, a non starter if you will. Furthermore they have NO business even trying.

Yes....

 

[spat]

Aside from what's stated above. Trump may not be able to just whip up an EO to restore the 2nd Amendment (I believe he can but...), but he can make an EO declaring those in violation of it and those in violation of upholding the oath to uphold and protect the Constitution be held liable and arrest them. This whole thing is being made more complicated than it really is. I would like them to stop pissing on us and trying to say it's raining.

EOs can't make law.

But they do tell federal agencies how to interpret and enforce them.

An EO stating that the ATF, FBI, DOJ, etc are interpret the federal laws appropriately would mean that they would take the narrowest possible interpretation (as opposed to the widest).

That also means they would have to drop appeals to many of the challenges in the courts as well.

"We sued to get the GCA and NFA overturned, and the DOJ didn't argue against us, because their official position is that it was a violation of the constitution too".

 

[Criticalt]

Thank you for the response/. You already know that I do not disagree with your thoughts and Ideas on this.

However, I am going to take the next few lines to point out stuff that we already know....

The President does not make laws. Not sure if I would want them to have that kind of power.

Taking away Federal monies.... I have always loved this idea. Hurt them where it hurts the most.

I do not think we can go after Judges that interpret the Constitution incorrectly. I really do not know. Great if we could.

"Can a state make laws that you cannot speak freely? Can a state make a law that a religion cannot be practiced? Can a state make a law allowing home searches without probable cause or a warrant?"

No they cannot. Not sure why it is allowed and tolerated with the 2A. Not sure exactly the powers of the President in this type of situation.

The power is in SCOTUS, not the Office of the President. Now, the AG may have more power to go in and break some balls. Again, I am not wise enough to understand all of the powers of these offices.

The President does not have the power to override the decisions of SCOTUS, only Congress passing laws have that ability. I blame the House and the Senate more than the President.

I go back to a statement that I made in another Thread, maybe it is time for President Trump to consult some of us here on these kinds of matters.

The anti 2A crowd in the US has had 200 years to rip apart, and get away with, stripping the 2A.

I am NOT making any excuses for Trump in not addressing this issue, he could definitely be more involved in what is going on in regards to our Rights being stripped.

I'm not saying that Trump should make laws. But he has a lot of power to push people to demand their congress people to demand action. If he were to wholeheartedly suggest people demand the law makers to protect the 2a, people would listen.
He is by far the most powerful tool to get these laws passed. He led the charge to get Roe vs Wade overturned, he gathered the support to get illegal aliens out, he is the ONE person that can get the ball rolling.
He cannot make laws, but along with the other two branches of government is literally how laws are made.
The president suggests it, the people demand it, congress passes it and the courts make decisions on it. That's how laws work.
Trump has TALKED about protecting the 2a, but just like last time, nothing significant is happening. You know the power he holds. If he were to get people riled up about pro gun legislation, people might get it done.
It can take years to get meaningful laws passed and cemented into law. He's already wasted too much time. For meaningful legislation to get voted on and settled into law, he better get moving.

 

[Grimscale]

It's true, but they are largely conservatives escaping.

Just like I came from NY and am not about to start voting Dem, lots of the CA escapees are well aware of what they are running from too.

But, it *is* slowly dragging us leftward.

My mother and my sister both moved to Arizona. They both vote "D" exclusively, and believe everything MSNBC says.
My sister's severely autistic son can't do anything without help, so my sister is allowed to be with him and coach him WHILE HE VOTES! Guess what way he votes?
My sister's socially inept daughter is similar. My sister coaches her on what to do when she votes.

 

[fresch]

Because conservatives don't riot, march singing hay ho get off my lawn, media will not cover actions by conservatives on guns, schools are teaching no gun rights (from back when my kids were in school ~30 yrs ago), all this plays into the left plan for control and take over; as we see today.
When conservatives start doing /acting like the rest of them, Jan 6 will be pulled out again unless all the players get arrested/ fired beforehand.
Just like a real take back of the U.S.A. who will start it. Who wants to be in a civil war.
If maximum power is the only way, the French Revolution will look like child's play compared to the purge that would happen. When good crushes evil, lot o bodies hitting the floor.
You are all in or not at all; not like the half ass way. That would be removing the majority of politicians .

 

[Old Jalopy]

EOs can't make law.

But they do tell federal agencies how to interpret and enforce them.

An EO stating that the ATF, FBI, DOJ, etc are interpret the federal laws appropriately would mean that they would take the narrowest possible interpretation (as opposed to the widest).

That also means they would have to drop appeals to many of the challenges in the courts as well.

"We sued to get the GCA and NFA overturned, and the DOJ didn't argue against us, because their official position is that it was a violation of the constitution too".

Executive orders can be written to start following the laws or face charges. I'm pretty sure even you've stated that's what needs to start happening. Until there are consequences for their actions, none of these politicians or LEO's are going to stop doing that they are doing. Odd how our POTUS cannot make laws, but here in NYS the NYSP can. How the hell does that work?
The 2nd Amendment is pretty clear, and as I keep saying even the 14th etches that it cannot be altered or infringed upon. I personally feel it doesn't matter, red or blue, do the job you're elected to do. I'm not one of those people who goes with the tide. We were told our gun rights would be restored, and so far all we get is bullshit and nothing substantial. If I own a business and promise my employees better something or other and don't do it, they won't be my employees for long, and it's my fault for not doing what I said I'd do.
These challenges would not be in place if lawmakers actually followed the las in the first place.
I don't know what to tell, you. Something needs to be done to block and stop the corruption from the little guys to the top dogs.
Other options? We all take a stand and start a war? That worked in a time when the militaries and common people all had the same weapons. In these times, we will lose and the only thing that will change is cemeteries will get a lot fuller. I DON'T SAY THAT OUT OF FEAR! I say that because it's the truth.

 

[Criticalt]

Executive orders can be written to start following the laws or face charges. I'm pretty sure even you've stated that's what needs to start happening. Until there are consequences for their actions, none of these politicians or LEO's are going to stop doing that they are doing. Odd how our POTUS cannot make laws, but here in NYS the NYSP can. How the hell does that work?
The 2nd Amendment is pretty clear, and as I keep saying even the 14th etches that it cannot be altered or infringed upon. I personally feel it doesn't matter, red or blue, do the job you're elected to do. I'm not one of those people who goes with the tide. We were told our gun rights would be restored, and so far all we get is bullshit and nothing substantial. If I own a business and promise my employees better something or other and don't do it, they won't be my employees for long, and it's my fault for not doing what I said I'd do.
These challenges would not be in place if lawmakers actually followed the las in the first place.
I don't know what to tell, you. Something needs to be done to block and stop the corruption from the little guys to the top dogs.
Other options? We all take a stand and start a war? That worked in a time when the militaries and common people all had the same weapons. In these times, we will lose and the only thing that will change is cemeteries will get a lot fuller. I DON'T SAY THAT OUT OF FEAR! I say that because it's the truth.

The president cannot make laws, neither can a governor. But the president can do exactly what Hochul is doing and Cuomo did, like I mentioned above.
He can present the law he wants to the House and Senate and they vote on it. If it passes, the courts rule on any shenanigans from the other side.
That's how the three branches of government make laws.....TOGETHER.
So, the president kind of can make laws if his party controls the other two branches.....like right fucking now!! As long as ACB doesn't stab us in the back AGAIN.
Trump did absolutely NOTHING last time the Republicans had all three branches around 2018.
We keep hearing these bullshit words from Trump about protecting the 2nd.
How about suggesting to congress to make a bill that eliminates ANY "assault weapon" ban that includes accessories and ammo.
Congress keeps throwing around this reciprocity bill.....well, where is the vote?
Where is the pressure from Trump and the citizens. Three months ago I emailed Shumer and Gillibrand to vote YES on a reciprocity bill. Neither replied, but that's all I can do from here. I can tell you guys, my family and friends to urge their legislatures.
But Trump has a huge voice and a huge following. My point that he needs to fo something is that he needs to make clear and concise demands, not this "we are going to protect the 2nd amendment" shit.
HOW are you going to do that Trump?
No gun bans? Reciprocity? Permitless carry? Punish violators?

 

[Robin]

Make federal laws protecting the 2a. Real laws with real protection.
Federal law Trumps state law where constitutional rights are concerned...pun intended.
Make laws that any infringement on the 2a will be heavily punished with fines and loss of federal aid.
When a gun law is overturned by SCOTUS, it means that a lower court and jurisdiction violated the oath they all swore to uphold.
Can a state make laws that you cannot speak freely? Can a state make a law that a religion cannot be practiced? Can a state make a law allowing home searches without probable cause or a warrant?
No, why not?
Because the constitution protects these rights and the three branches of government are bound to uphold these rights against rouge states.
States have pretty free will over most laws, but they cannot defy these few rules.
Trump is actively allowing this and does have the power, along with congress and the SCOTUS to set it right. My guess is he will not.

You are right of course, but the Supremes have never decided a second amendment issue based on the literal interpretation of the constitution. It is self evident, 'shall not be infringed', but they will not hold legislation against it.

https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/92/542.html

I guess this is where the loss of our rights as free citizens under the protection of the Bill of Rights began.
Robin

 

[spat]

My mother and my sister both moved to Arizona. They both vote "D" exclusively, and believe everything MSNBC says.
My sister's severely autistic son can't do anything without help, so my sister is allowed to be with him and coach him WHILE HE VOTES! Guess what way he votes?
My sister's socially inept daughter is similar. My sister coaches her on what to do when she votes.

Sounds like my sister, but she stayed in NY.

My father mainlines CNN and votes the way you would expect after that, but he's lived here in AZ for 50 years.

 

[SomeSoldier]

This is all a show. The game is rigged. You are witnessing the other side of the same coin.

 

[Old Jalopy]

The president cannot make laws, neither can a governor. But the president can do exactly what Hochul is doing and Cuomo did, like I mentioned above.
He can present the law he wants to the House and Senate and they vote on it. If it passes, the courts rule on any shenanigans from the other side.
That's how the three branches of government make laws.....TOGETHER.
So, the president kind of can make laws if his party controls the other two branches.....like right fucking now!! As long as ACB doesn't stab us in the back AGAIN.
Trump did absolutely NOTHING last time the Republicans had all three branches around 2018.
We keep hearing these bullshit words from Trump about protecting the 2nd.
How about suggesting to congress to make a bill that eliminates ANY "assault weapon" ban that includes accessories and ammo.
Congress keeps throwing around this reciprocity bill.....well, where is the vote?
Where is the pressure from Trump and the citizens. Three months ago I emailed Shumer and Gillibrand to vote YES on a reciprocity bill. Neither replied, but that's all I can do from here. I can tell you guys, my family and friends to urge their legislatures.
But Trump has a huge voice and a huge following. My point that he needs to fo something is that he needs to make clear and concise demands, not this "we are going to protect the 2nd amendment" shit.
HOW are you going to do that Trump?
No gun bans? Reciprocity? Permitless carry? Punish violators?

The problem is, neither the SAFE Act nor the CCIA went through any channels. No house, senate, nothing. Essentially making them executive orders which are laws. The CCIA was actually in violation Bruen because twat face threw a temper tantrum. It's also odd how law enforcement are not supposed to make laws, their job is to enforce them. But here we are with NYSP making and and amending laws.
So while the POTUS may not factually be able to make a law, he can and should be doing something about corruption. If you clean the swamp then clean the swamp.

I am a Trump guy, but I expect more this time around. We all get mad when the courts drag thier feet or don't do what they are supposed to, so Trump should be held to that same standard. The midterms aren't looking to good for the Rep. currently with all that's going on, so things need to get done yesterday not next year.

 

[GOPerfect]

The problem is, neither the SAFE Act nor the CCIA went through any channels. No house, senate, nothing. Essentially making them executive orders which are laws. The CCIA was actually in violation Bruen because twat face threw a temper tantrum. It's also odd how law enforcement are not supposed to make laws, their job is to enforce them. But here we are with NYSP making and and amending laws.
So while the POTUS may not factually be able to make a law, he can and should be doing something about corruption. If you clean the swamp then clean the swamp.

I am a Trump guy, but I expect more this time around. We all get mad when the courts drag thier feet or don't do what they are supposed to, so Trump should be held to that same standard. The midterms aren't looking to good for the Rep. currently with all that's going on, so things need to get done yesterday not next year.

SAFE Act did in fact go through the process.... In the State capital of Albany.

It was challenged and for the most part, the highest Court in the land upheld the Act.