Take away all of the security, bodyguards, and secret service from these Liberal nut cases, since "guns do not protect you", they shouldn't need them.
Take away one Right, you might as well take them all, and become a part of the UK again. These idiots needs to be left helpless to defend themselves, in a world of criminals and see how they like it. Police and Military should not be considered "better" than anyone else, especially given the corruption within the system. Guns=Freedom
When the constitution was written the people WERE the army. It was a right for the military because it was the PEOPLE. If the states can decide to take 2nd amendment rights, I want kansas to take away the freedom of speech from Westboro baptist church. The America we live in today is really more concentrated on trying to take God given rights away than finding away to stop people from despicably harassing and protesting at soldiers funerals? Nobama2012.
Well drugs in county jail is banned and prohibited ect ect. Guess what? Criminals are still able to get them. Criminals donot follow laws and regulations.
FF to 2008: the U.S. Supreme Court ruled and clarified precisely what "to keep and bear arms" means and also wrote, "Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct."
IF the 2nd applied to the military then it is entirely meaningless as the guns supplied to military men can be TAKEN from them at any damned time the government desires.
Secondly, this moron justice fails to connect the dots from 'the PEOPLE' in one part of the Bill of Rights to every other instance of 'the PEOPLE'.
Maybe we should take away HER rights as a woman to vote..
The irony of the anti gun agenda is that they seem to prefer arguing numbers and clearly dont really give a rats rear end about individual human lives.
As long as 1000 drug dealing gangbangers dont shoot each other tonite, its apparently been a good day to them if only 100 women are raped and stabbed to death with a screwdriver.
As long as GUN murders are down they clearly dont give a shit about anything or anyone else.
4 of the Supreme Court justices have committed treason in my opinion. They should be impeached and removed from the court.
I can understand the 4 SCJ saying the cities county and states have a right to keep felons from having a gun because they lost certain right when convicted and mentally dangerous person if a court judge that person to so.
But laws like DC and Chicago are so far past that, the laws are not even laughable.
Most people have to wonder what kind of a dictionary that has definition that so corrupted the meaning of the words; bare, keep, shall, not, infringe, upon. That allowed the 4 SCJ was using it to be able to make an imbecile judgment.
@HarvardLawGroup I just exposed you for being stupid!! I KNEW you were simply a dishonest liberal/ hater of anything conservative!! Why do you say these women are dumb? Because they don't tow your party line?? You need to shut up before I chase you around this site making you look like the idiot that you are- everywhere!
@HarvardLawGroup Btw.. for those who care to witness this asshole's idiocy and hypocrisy- [[I exposed you on another video page, isn't that right, numbnuts?!] Find it by clicking on his name.. and then his comments.
@kickyerass Try something for me, read all of your posts with a lisp. I found it very funny. And also again with these female text slangs that you use, like "btw" seriously please stop. How can a man talk like that very disturbing
lol whatts really funny is that I'm cleaning my Mosin-Nagant. This is my gun and my property, taking it from me is stealing, no matter how you try to sugar coat it. Oh, and its Russian too, don't mess with me lol
now if he was robbing you and you also had gun : give him your money, wait for him to turn around, draw gun, shoot shoulders and a leg, call 911, get your money back while being a wiseass to robber :D
Hey jap I'm extremely proficient in muay thai and jiu jitsu I'll be the first to say I'm not going for a wrist grab when a dude has a beretta pointed at my head...stupid asian you can't make up for your small dick making stories up about how you'll win a gun fight with a knife and fancy locks...idiot
@hangfire0352 That's not it. She doesn't like our founding fathers, our Constitution or Bill Of Rights. Obama loves her because she's a radical who doesn't believe in individual freedom or this nation being special.
@kickyerass so your brilliant arguments consist of... Obama loves radicals and Obama dosent believe in freedom and Obama doesnt think this nation is special? You really have a nack for formulating compelling and well researched arguments! and I especially love how you are so humble, because a man of your level of education and intelligence must just find it wickedly depressing to have to argue with such idiocy
@Whitekid762 Cmon man weed isn't a positive influence on people 99 percent of the time... medical is fine as long as it is applied with common sense, but I watched a good friend of mine lose his job due to his stupid weed addiction. He was a good person, he would NEVER do that to himself. Idk if it's the weed for sure, but to me, i'd rather not deal with weed. But hey, look at what you just said to someone who lost a family member. You called him retarted, is that what weed makes you do?
Sounds to me like it wasn't the weed but poor decisions that killed him. I know many people who smoke weed and none of them break in houses or wave guns at people.
Marijuana does indeed destroy lives. My brother's desire (addiction) for this drug resulted in his death. An occasional "joint" escalated into a need for money to buy ever more. He started dealing, followed by a gun for protection. A bad purchase (mold & mildew) urged him to break into homes for money to replace that. He shot at a homeowner (missed). While shopping for marijuana, waving money in a bad neighborhood, he was robbed at gunpoint and shot twice. He was 22-years old.
@stewartx5 your brother was a stupid son of a bitch i glad people like that dont last on this earth for long.and because of people like your brother is excactly why we need to have the right to protect our selves witha firearm.
@elmajiko420 Mkay dude, I like the fact that you are supporting gun rights, but uhh, that kind of attitude ain't gunna get us far with the liberals. It's okay to get pissed a drug abusers, but if it pushes me further from my gun rights, then i try to be as calm as possible ;)
Yes, he was an idiot. Both for messing with drugs and the bad things he did afterwards. The family did all we could. Our mother (the "bitch," as you put it) turned him in to the police (one year in prison) and I offered him alternatives (job, home, etc). Nothing changed his mindset or behavior.
@RebelGuy95 You have explained it very well -- the second amendment means that the military has a right to have guns. Otherwise they would have to defend the country with sling shots :-) Stupid is the correct term. You got it right. Sotomayor is stupid. Ditto the people who support her position.
Anyhow, the right to defend yourself doesn't come from government; it's our right as living, breathing human beings. All people have the right to defend themselves.
if you really love your weapons buy extra and hide them dont register them either
buy as much ammo as you can afford and bury it, then get equipment to reload your empty casings. another good idea is to create a militia so the government cant touch your organazations weapons have it so your are protected under the second amendment no matter what the supreme court rules
@MrMZaccone Unfortunately, that doesn't mean we can't be hassled for it, every day for our entire lives by a corrupt legal system that doesn't always enforce the laws, and instead enforces their interpretation of them.
You do know the justices can be impeached and removed from the supreme court. One was impeached for his federalist leaning.
From some of the decision that are be handed down on the second amendment you would think four justices are twisting the constitution to fit their own beliefs and/or taking orders from the president.
Although I mostly don't like Fox news, I will admit that they actually had a point when they pointed out Sotomayor's insane views on gun control. I hope people see the truth and hopefully she'll somehow lose her commission as a justice later on.
* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.
@Denverlibertarion don't mention crazy people, repeat offenders, fellins, and domestic terrorists. but that is beside the point, they are taken away my right to have a weapon. i have quiet the armory myself but these laws are in place to keep guns away from people who can't handle a gun or will kill people with it.
@Denverlibertarion just because it is a law doesn't mean it is going it work. i am 100% sure that if they outlawed guns altogether you are going to not forfeit your guns easily. so if a killer is going to kill, they are not going to use a legal gun, that is retarded, you get a untraceable, illegal gun so the police can't track you so easily. communism is a deferent argument altogether, one that is unwinable by either of us because it's an argument about politics, politics sucks, inquisition FTW
@happyorks1 You wrote:just because it is a law doesn't mean it is going it work. so if a killer is going to kill, they are not going to use a legal gun.
So why should we make it difficult for a law abiding citizen to get one? If the killers are going to kill they'll get one anyway. Doesn't make a difference whether the stone hits the glass or the glass hits the stone, it aint gonna hurt the stone. I feel safer knowing fellow law abiding citizens are armed than not armed and some psycho is.
@Denverlibertarion we don't know if you are law abiding, we take that on faith, the government isn't allowed to have faith. how long are you planning to be that way? are you going to rob a store with that gun? kill your wife? or use it for self-defends? not everyone has the same moral compass and ambitions. we wouldn't need a weapon if that was the case
@happyorks1 But why worry when I can get it from Homie G and his crew. Thats what people do in Chicago now that guns are outlawed. A lot of good that did.
@Denverlibertarion well either way it doesn't apply to me because i have blades, and training to use the blades. no reloading, no jams, just a wet stone and a cloth to keep me cutin'.
@happyorks1 Ever heard of "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight"? Your knife will do nothing for you when faced with a criminal with a gun. You will get in much more trouble in most U.S. states if you stab someone with a knife instead of shooting them with a gun (for protection).
@happyorks1 Well, if this was Hollywood, then this might work. For those of us older than 5 years old, then no. Why would a guy have a gun if he is going to stick it in your face? Most robbers are going to come in your house, and shoot you as soon as they see you. People like me are prepared, and practice to shoot better than the criminal. He will shoot someone like you from across the room. Your imagination is fun, but it doesn't work in real life.
@bb152005 have you ever thought maybe i have practiced a lot of marshal arts? ninjutsu (japan), taijutsu (japan), krav (Israel), ti quan do (Korea), kendo (japan), and a general "Art of War". and yes it does work. i was working at a convince store and a guy with tries to rob me, i brake his writs with a nagamora strike, and scare the shit out of him. yes this shit works. guns are a great tool but relying on your piece is a great to get yourself killed. "a gun with no bullets is a glorified club"
@happyorks1 Well, stand a hundred yards from a guy with a gun, and lets see who wins. If you do that, then I wont be expecting a reply. How old are you? You didn't even pay attention in school when they were teaching you how to spell, so I doubt you took any other classes to teach you fighting. Keep living in fantasy land buddy. I'm not responding to you anymore, because you are an idiot.
@bb152005 boy, trying to find someone to debate with is fucking hard. they always think your trolling, i know a gun is preferable to a knife at 100 yard. unless you are in gangland or Afghanistan, they will try to rob you, JUST rob, you no one wants to add first degree murder. 猿野郎 Japanese is my first langue dick
If guns are ever outlawed, I will be an outlaw. If I get arrested 10 times for illegally having a firearm, then so be it. Id rather be tried by 12 and go to prison, then watch somebody hurt my wife, steall all my shit, and kill me.
it looks like THEY are trying to create civil unrest in order to cause an up rising among the American people so they can declare marshal law and limit the rights that we have as Americans. if i was big government and that were my goal i would go after the 2nd amendment for a few reasons.reason 1 an unarmed public could not fight for there rights . reason 2 the love of our 2nd amendment right spans most groups races and genders.
If we dont defend the 2nd amendment then we will never be able to defend anything else. i feel it will be a sad day the day they try to disarm the American people .how ever one of the things i love most about america and the people who live here is that amercans wont just lay down and give up our rights.
Seems to me that you haven't learned from the past. You would think that with Germany's past, you would learn from history. The last time I checked, when citizens were barred from owning firearms, millions of Jews died. The Nazi's weren't so successful when it came to cleaning out the Warsaw ghetto. Maybe that is why Israel has adopted the slogan, "Never Again!"
The point is this. THE PEOPLE. These two words are at the beginging of the contitution and have a meaning. That meaning does not change in the 2nd amendment. THE PEOPLE. If any judge denies that right, then they have ruled against the whole contitution. In other words, who decides whom THE PEOPLE are? What if a judge says the that the people are the whites, or indians, etc. Any right that use the words THE PEOPLE mean a right of all the PEOPLE. This could start the next armed revolution.
can someone explain why she thinks that the 2nd Amendment applies to the federal govt. and not the citizens? that makes absolutely no sense. the Bill of Rights was added because anti-Federalists feared that citizens' rights would have been trampled after the Federalists passed the Constitution. that's why the Bill of Rights was passed, to protect the individual citizens' rights, NOT the federal government.
If she believes a state can overrule a constitutional right, ie: they have the authority to regulate to the point of not allowing ownership of firearms, what would she then say when a state decides to say, "we have no regulation of our citizens in this state?" My guess is that would be time for her to say the feds have authority to overrule the state.
Hey sotomayor, I have a ruling for you. You'r radical leftist opinions no longer matter. You as a communist are impotent like the rest of your party. Don't like my attitude? Get out of my country.
why are people so stupid. we have the right not the liberty to own and BEAR arms. period. its a right that means it is unalienable. you either give your right away or you keep on chugging. if its your right that means no registration, no jumping through hoops. its your right, and if a law infringes upon your right it is emediately null and void. we are americans, we arm ourselves, this is between you and your god not you and your government. liberty does not=right, get it through your heads
@VERGIS92- America was armed with nuclear weapons in WWII and during which time dropped the only A-bombs ever in a war on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Nuclear weapons have not in any way made the world more stable. If anything, they have led to the chaotic and impulsive spending of yours, mine, and mainly Russian tax dollars in a crazed race for militaristic power, a virtue that may seem intertwined with stability, but as we have seen has only led to a reality which is far from anything stable.
My point is that having reasonable nuclear arsenal is one thing- most developed nations have a couple hundred for their own protection- England has around 250 for example. But the U.S. has long ago hit the point of diminishing returns- where building more nukes ends up becoming a waste time, money and resources; and that craze for neo-consveritism displayed by the U.S. has not only led to much blow back, but has just dumped fuel on a fire we should be trying to put out, not make bigger.
@Verbalmint just wanna remind you that the only offensive nuclear weapons use in the history of man was by the democrats. Not the army, not the 'neo-cons', the democrats.
The US and Russia have been downsizing their nuke stocks for years. Unfortunately nukes have a 'use by date' and need to be replaced, that's a fact.
In my original comment I never said I disagreed with Truman's decision to drop the a-bomb (although I do still disagree with the target choices and eagerness to launch it). But Vergis92 is right, it did end the war and very likely saved lives.
But the damage from those two bombs, compared to how many thousands were already dropped, was so high and caused the Japanese to surrender in one day means that you don't need many of them to make your point.
Before the first Russian nuclear warhead was built the U.S. already had 4,000+ war heads. It took the Russians 20 years to become equal with us in stockpile size, which, when they did was about 25,000.
In Russia and in the U.S. there are less than 300 cities with a population greater than 100,000 people.
Around 1965, at our stockpile's peak, we had close to 35,000 warheads, while the Russians only had about 6,000. And at the Russian's peak they had a staggering 45,000 warheads.
@Verbalmint actually when satcom was created there was only 9 atomic bombs in existence and before actuall warheads even existed for missiles the soviets had caught up and for a period were in fact ahead during their sputnik launches before it crashed
@spartanunoob Ok, well an overly excessive amount of warheads, whether they were for missles or not, is still a gross misplacement of our tax dollars in my mind. I am not saying we should not invest in national defense; I am saying that we need to remain balanced and reasonable in everything we do. If you were the soviets, I bet you would be pretty alarmed when your "enemy" (at the time the U.S.) had 4k+ nuclear warheads and you had 0. I wonder how things would have gone if we both started at 0.
@Verbalmint me too and the apache attack helicopters are supposed to get 2 or 3 million dollars worth of upgrades so the best army on the planet has to spend all its money so we can be even deadlier its way overkill man so many better ways we could use the money
@Verb What those bombs did do is stop the Japanese from killing, raping, enslaving and starving untold millions in China, the Pacific Islands and South East Asia. Since that time, Japan has never attempted another attack, and have no ability to do so. No other country has ever attempted to form a nuclear attack against us. So I would say, Yup, in a nuclear way. It stabilized the world at that time. And militaristic power is the only power powers respond to. Wake up
I live in an area full of immigrants and potentially lethal criminals among them, yet it is one of the areas where there's zero burglaries, almost no crime, why
do you think that is? because 1 in 3 citizens does have an illegal handgun, and the absolute will to use it, the last criminal to attempt a house burglary was shot dead by
@BusterXXXL In part yes, but also they have a deterrent force, you need to count how many lives guns have saved, and how many criminals they have dererred, it is also a fact that neclear weapons have made the world a more stable place, and have saved 100 times more lives than they killed, sounds hard to believe? If America was nuclearly armed in WWII, the japanese wouldn't even think to attack, or draw US to war, how many soldiers
guns have made many societies safer, much like nuclear weapons have averted many wars, they act as deterrent power. If you remove guns criminals will resort to knives and killer shooters will resort to bow and arrow, and these are harder to trace in crimes
not to mention much less lethal. I would prefer arguing with a drunk thats armed with a knife anytime above arguing one with a gun. And bow and arrow harder to trace in crimes? O_o
5-4? it should have been 9-0. We have the individual right to bear arms I would rather be considered a criminal for owning a firearm for self defense than be defenseless.
say were together and im holding a knife. are there any circumstances where plunging that knife into your chest would actually help you instead of kill you on the spot?
what if im a surgeon and you have cancer and im operating right now because if i operate right now i can get it all but if i wait then it will spread and kill you. then a tool possible of great injury can help you instead. guns are like that. misused they kill innocents.used correctly they can save innocents
Isn't sotomayor a member of la RAZA, the "pure race". Remember Hitler had to push gun control to do his thing. sotomayor is a member of the 'pure race' and her desire to push gun control is a good hint to what she really wants to do. ;)
groundhog you are such a typical liberal that cant mind their own business and wants to control everyone else,.I would bet that you are an unattractive female that can't get a man and you blame everyone else for your lonely life predicament .HOT TIP try working out put on some make up and stop your incessant bitching and control freak attitude
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
I do not believe that a person should be able to get a license to carry a gun. I mean, what are they protecting?? It just seems like they have something to be scared of, or they wouldnt be carrying a gun!!
apparently you are 6 yrs old and you dont understand how the world works yet but gun owners get guns to protect the lives of themselves and their family members. criminals have guns. law abiding citizens have a god given right to protect themselves and their property. POLICE ARE NOT REQUIRED BY LAW TO PROTECT CITIZENS. their job is to take pictures of victims and then find the bad guy. WE MUST DEFEND OURSELVES. 2nd_Amendment forever !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Well, my step mother's life was saved when a man in a parking lot threatened her with a blunt instrument.
Criminals who do not obey rape or murder laws don't care about gun laws so gun control only affects people who care about the law an example would be my step mother.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
We need gun control!! I was in a home improvement store lately. When the guy next to me leaned over to look at something, I saw a gun under his jacket. I quickly notified store management. They refused to do anything, saying that he was a regular customer, and that there was no rules about not taking a concealed gun into the store. I told them that if it were properly concealed, I wouldnt have seen it. Anyway, they said that what he was doing was fine. It still makes me nervous!!
@sparuto117 dude I hate to burst your bubble but if the gov wanted to and could get the pple to go along with it, you guns would not help against our military. You would die long before you ever herd or knew they were at your door.
@AquaticLD50 Thats intresting. Thinck about it. The majority of people in the military are pro gun. So are ther families. They are befinitely more right wing then left and they would definitely fight for our rights before they fight against them. At least thats how it should be.
@AquaticLD50 have u never watched the movie red dawn or heard the story of the soviet occupation of afghanistan using guerilla warfare and if u had any number of people u could hit and run and keep up a sustantial war inside of occupied territory and in that case it dosent matter if the army blows u away who wants to live in a world where u are not free and were we can be forced to do things by a tyrannical government that is the real point of the 2nd ammendment to resist tyranny at all costs
@spartanunoob Yes I have seen red dawn, and read all about the soviet occup. of afghan. I understand that guerilla warfare is very effective...and I understand that the 2nd amendment was put there to keep a tyrannical gov from comeing to power (failing so far imo) but what I was saying was that if the gov had a fully functioning military (saying most didnt leave) an insurection would get crushed.
@AquaticLD50 yeah but the thing is i understand their extremely large advantage but for the last nine years we have been hunting for osama and his terrorists and they are in a damn hole somewhere and we have yet to gain full victory so i dont think it would be crushed if everyone didnt gather into a small room so they could bomb us lol
"We have a problem - health care, so lets just give it everyone
When the FFA went from private to federal, delays increased, etc.
competition between airports occured when it was private... then competion disappeared.
Obama wants to reform health care (good idea, better than 'change') but because O's a commy, he decides that the bill is gonna tax rich people. Not gonna work, this is why we are in recession, because americans are taxed to much
Democracy is a form of government and compared to others it allows more freedom. More than socialism, monarchy, etc. But it is not perfect but there is nothing better. Democracy must be supplemented with a system to protect the individual from the mob or else the mob will simply vote to have certain individual's rights violated. Checks and balances.
'Vader12...', you are BRAINWASHED! We will never have a truly small government because our capitalist system is NOT perfect, so we NEED a given amount of government to serve the people in a good way. But of course, your puny, infantile, simpleton mind cannot grasp this basic fact. Europeans who have single payer systems consider themselves conservative because they care about their fellow man enough to insure they all get proper healthcare access. They don't dabble in trillion dollar wars!
yes, i lived in the UK for 4 years and experienced the marvel of social healthcare.... IT F'N SUCKED! My friend broke his arm, doc said "come back in three days and we'll put a cast on it, in the meantime, here's a pillow to make a sling.
Aquantaince gets cancer: has to wait two months BEFORE SHE EVEN GETS TO SEE THE ECONOLOGIST!
Private health care... Get a cast within an hour. See the Econlogist within a week.
Cooperation can only get you so far. you need competition
You're a LIAR! I've lived in Germany, Greece, and Canada thus far in my 47 years, and in all those countries, the healthcare I received was efficient and top-notch. And I didn't have to pay a cent. I had an appendix removed in Athens, was treated for Crohn's disease in Canada, and had my heart meds changed while in Germany. There are far too many Americans NOT getting the care they need, because they cannot afford the super expensive procedures and/or insurance here. Many are losing homes.
I broke my thumb in the UK, but because I was American, the my government paid for me to go see a hand specialist within a week.
there you go, if you're in a foreign country, you're home government is gonna take care of you. Working abroad helps them, so it's not an all give situation.
I'm gonna post another comment, so read that one too....
Liar, Just wait till you get REAL sick. Then you'll be in trouble.
BTW, in Massachusetts Maine and California where they have that crap, people wait in line forever and doctors have no say in treatment for patients. The burecrats are the only ones who will benefit.
no you are the liar, there are far too many americans without insurance getting top notch rapid car because many hospitals policy is to turn no one away.
Modern-day capitalism has devolved into globalism that has siphoned off considerable wealth away from the U.S. Government is needed more than ever, and this does not equate to pure Socialism. You desperate right wing nutjobs are so naive.
socialism isn't progress, it's quite backward. And gun control leads to more violence. If everyone had a gun, I bet criminals would think twice about robbing a house
It's beyond pathetic how so many of you uneducated simpleton morons overuse the word 'Socialism', not knowing what it means! We, as well as most other contemporary western democracies (Europe, Australia, Canada, etc.) have a 'mixed economy' consisting of government to serve the people and free markets. Our government pays for police and firefighters, yet I don't hear you 'cry Socialism'! Government is NOT the problem... we NEED many government organizations like the FAA, FTC, FCC, FDA, etc.
you're pathetic... socialsim is bad... a completely capitalist society would be the best and healthiest
BUT!!! You fail to take into account that the constitution says the government will provide basics. (and to prove that I know what socialism is, you twit, Karl Marx invented the idea of Public Education....)
the governemt needs to regulate pretty much nothing, just what can harm us (like bad food, hence the FDA) but they do not need to have their fingers in every little thing
'Vader12', you are brainwashed and deluded bigtime. A complete Capitalist society with minimal government laws and intervention would be disastrous, given the fact that faceless corporations don't have our best interests in mind. We flawed humans will always checks and balances provided by government and laws to make our lives easier and more moral. 'Mixed economies' will always be the rule.
you're a retard, i said that. mixed economy (like 70% captialist and 30% gov) is what we need... Capitalism = diversity = good. BUT!!! (read this time) we need the FDA to make sure people are not selling us food with E Coli in it..., etc
the government's job is to make sure we are safe and free. Not to give us health care, welfare (a good idea, but it needs to be more heavily regulated for it to actually be a legitimate good idea), etc
'Vader12...' you are an ignoramus. Do us all a favor and spare us your tired, canned Limbaugh rants about government. The truth is government is sizeable in any contemporary western nation like the U.S., despite which party is in office. You mention the words 'safe' and 'free', yet obviously you know not the true meaning of those words. We are not safe, nor are we free if nearly 50 million of us do not have health insurance! The Canadians understand. Europe understands. We don't.
Sotomayor on Roe v Wade is settled law , Sotomayor was evasive when asked about whether gun ownership is a fundamental right when she stated I'm not taking an opinion on that issue, because it's an open question. What? If Roe v Wade is settled the 2nd amendment should be as well but not in the mind of Sotomayor. Sotomayor will definitely boost gun and ammo sales as in a recent article it stated "Hand guns and the tactical weapons, sales they're absolutely off the charts.
Check this out: I don't care what the law says. Me being a law abiding citizen, I will get a gun. And if liberals or the government has problem with that then I'll put a few of them 6 feet under.
The broader issue is that Judge SoSo thinks that the Constitution is not binding upon the individual states. We are truly viewing an inferior legal mind.
Soto is a genuine traitor. She also ruled in favor of discrimination against white people by government employers, which is also unconstitutional. She hates white people and our rights, so naturally Obama digs her up and crowns her.
The beauty of the revolution was the realization of the PEOPLE to govern themselves. The people realized they can change WHICHEVER laws they want that match the needs and wants of the people best and that they do not have to live by the laws of a few chimerical fantasists in government.
All you have to do is Dance on the Head of every letter written to make a new law. This is outrageous Law was made to Liberate not to Regulate. no matter what we do, the laws will be re worded and will walk circles around the constitution, with just a little lie mixed in, can make the whole truth Good for absolutely nothing. mixing the Constitution with personal opinion.
hot news whores
changeofaddress1 2 weeks ago
Take away all of the security, bodyguards, and secret service from these Liberal nut cases, since "guns do not protect you", they shouldn't need them.
Take away one Right, you might as well take them all, and become a part of the UK again. These idiots needs to be left helpless to defend themselves, in a world of criminals and see how they like it. Police and Military should not be considered "better" than anyone else, especially given the corruption within the system. Guns=Freedom
KevinJayCash 2 weeks ago
You xenophobic, homophobic, Leave it to Beaver trip back to the 50's... Republicans suck!!
fsushawn70 1 month ago
When the constitution was written the people WERE the army. It was a right for the military because it was the PEOPLE. If the states can decide to take 2nd amendment rights, I want kansas to take away the freedom of speech from Westboro baptist church. The America we live in today is really more concentrated on trying to take God given rights away than finding away to stop people from despicably harassing and protesting at soldiers funerals? Nobama2012.
gunsaregood100 1 month ago
Well drugs in county jail is banned and prohibited ect ect. Guess what? Criminals are still able to get them. Criminals donot follow laws and regulations.
dcrt75 2 months ago
"There are two types of people in this world. Those with guns and those who dig. You dig."- Clint Eastwood
"The darkest shadow that has fallen on India by the British is the removal of firearms from it's people."-Ghandi
"Those who turn their their swords into plows shall plow for those who have not turned their swords into plows."-Thomas Jefferson
"If you carry a bag of goods carry a sword. If you have no sword sell your cloak and buy one."- Jesus Christ
These quotes are not word for word.
drnogood59 2 months ago
The 2nd amendment is the real life insurance "Being armed grants security of your freedoms, and separates you from the subjects"
giga4a 2 months ago
I'm a Paramedic and this is the plan I came up with for citizens PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY:
While waiting for the:
FIRE DEPT:
Practice fire drills, use extinguishers for small fires, get out for large fires, etc.
AMBULANCE:
Give CPR/first aid while waiting for the ambulance.
POLICE:
Use self defense tools. (guns, knives, etc) as needed to protect yourself while waiting for the Police.
Bad things happen while waiting.Guns are simply tools like fire extinguishers. They save lives
romansten9 3 months ago
A gun in hand is better than a cop on phone.
InfidelOpsSniper 3 months ago 2
FF to 2008: the U.S. Supreme Court ruled and clarified precisely what "to keep and bear arms" means and also wrote, "Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct."
stevenkh1 3 months ago
Shes a dumbass.
IF the 2nd applied to the military then it is entirely meaningless as the guns supplied to military men can be TAKEN from them at any damned time the government desires.
Secondly, this moron justice fails to connect the dots from 'the PEOPLE' in one part of the Bill of Rights to every other instance of 'the PEOPLE'.
Maybe we should take away HER rights as a woman to vote..
AmericansForGuns0com 4 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
The irony of the anti gun agenda is that they seem to prefer arguing numbers and clearly dont really give a rats rear end about individual human lives.
As long as 1000 drug dealing gangbangers dont shoot each other tonite, its apparently been a good day to them if only 100 women are raped and stabbed to death with a screwdriver.
As long as GUN murders are down they clearly dont give a shit about anything or anyone else.
AmericansForGuns0com 4 months ago
Guns have been banned in Mexico since 1916. Since then only corrupt cops and narco terrorists.
2204Alpha 5 months ago
Obama is a nigger.
87cadillachearse 5 months ago
4 of the Supreme Court justices have committed treason in my opinion. They should be impeached and removed from the court.
I can understand the 4 SCJ saying the cities county and states have a right to keep felons from having a gun because they lost certain right when convicted and mentally dangerous person if a court judge that person to so.
samten10a 5 months ago
But laws like DC and Chicago are so far past that, the laws are not even laughable.
Most people have to wonder what kind of a dictionary that has definition that so corrupted the meaning of the words; bare, keep, shall, not, infringe, upon. That allowed the 4 SCJ was using it to be able to make an imbecile judgment.
samten10a 5 months ago
Shes from NYC of course shes anti second amendment.
EverHurt 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Affirmative action at its best on display.
Qualifications for court:
1. Woman (sort of)
2. Minority
Congratulations, you pass.
maxfirepower 5 months ago
Comment removed
maxfirepower 5 months ago
Fox employs the dumbest commentators
HarvardLawGroup 6 months ago
@HarvardLawGroup I just exposed you for being stupid!! I KNEW you were simply a dishonest liberal/ hater of anything conservative!! Why do you say these women are dumb? Because they don't tow your party line?? You need to shut up before I chase you around this site making you look like the idiot that you are- everywhere!
kickyerass 5 months ago
@kickyerass OHHH NOOO PLEASE DONT DO THAT! Brother you need a woman in your life
LawGrouppartner 5 months ago
@HarvardLawGroup Btw.. for those who care to witness this asshole's idiocy and hypocrisy- [[I exposed you on another video page, isn't that right, numbnuts?!] Find it by clicking on his name.. and then his comments.
kickyerass 5 months ago
@kickyerass Try something for me, read all of your posts with a lisp. I found it very funny. And also again with these female text slangs that you use, like "btw" seriously please stop. How can a man talk like that very disturbing
LawGrouppartner 5 months ago
DOES THE CONSTITUTION OFFEND YOU?
CALL 1-800-LEAVE-THE-U.S.A
ichy10462 6 months ago
lol whatts really funny is that I'm cleaning my Mosin-Nagant. This is my gun and my property, taking it from me is stealing, no matter how you try to sugar coat it. Oh, and its Russian too, don't mess with me lol
ForgotteMemories101 6 months ago
now if he was robbing you and you also had gun : give him your money, wait for him to turn around, draw gun, shoot shoulders and a leg, call 911, get your money back while being a wiseass to robber :D
ILikeToShootZombies 6 months ago
Hey jap I'm extremely proficient in muay thai and jiu jitsu I'll be the first to say I'm not going for a wrist grab when a dude has a beretta pointed at my head...stupid asian you can't make up for your small dick making stories up about how you'll win a gun fight with a knife and fancy locks...idiot
12gaugeG 6 months ago
Evidently this justice can't read.
hangfire0352 7 months ago
@hangfire0352 That's not it. She doesn't like our founding fathers, our Constitution or Bill Of Rights. Obama loves her because she's a radical who doesn't believe in individual freedom or this nation being special.
kickyerass 5 months ago
@kickyerass so your brilliant arguments consist of... Obama loves radicals and Obama dosent believe in freedom and Obama doesnt think this nation is special? You really have a nack for formulating compelling and well researched arguments! and I especially love how you are so humble, because a man of your level of education and intelligence must just find it wickedly depressing to have to argue with such idiocy
LawGrouppartner 5 months ago
@Whitekid762 weed is actually harmful you nob
MrThedudeman1 7 months ago
@MrThedudeman1 how is it harmful? makes you sleepy? lol
MegaDanbo 6 months ago
@Whitekid762 Cmon man weed isn't a positive influence on people 99 percent of the time... medical is fine as long as it is applied with common sense, but I watched a good friend of mine lose his job due to his stupid weed addiction. He was a good person, he would NEVER do that to himself. Idk if it's the weed for sure, but to me, i'd rather not deal with weed. But hey, look at what you just said to someone who lost a family member. You called him retarted, is that what weed makes you do?
SuperSneakySniper 7 months ago
Sounds to me like it wasn't the weed but poor decisions that killed him. I know many people who smoke weed and none of them break in houses or wave guns at people.
1s1t1e1v1e1 7 months ago
@Whitekid762
Marijuana does indeed destroy lives. My brother's desire (addiction) for this drug resulted in his death. An occasional "joint" escalated into a need for money to buy ever more. He started dealing, followed by a gun for protection. A bad purchase (mold & mildew) urged him to break into homes for money to replace that. He shot at a homeowner (missed). While shopping for marijuana, waving money in a bad neighborhood, he was robbed at gunpoint and shot twice. He was 22-years old.
stewartx5 8 months ago
@stewartx5 your brother was a stupid son of a bitch i glad people like that dont last on this earth for long.and because of people like your brother is excactly why we need to have the right to protect our selves witha firearm.
elmajiko420 7 months ago
@elmajiko420 Mkay dude, I like the fact that you are supporting gun rights, but uhh, that kind of attitude ain't gunna get us far with the liberals. It's okay to get pissed a drug abusers, but if it pushes me further from my gun rights, then i try to be as calm as possible ;)
SuperSneakySniper 7 months ago
@SuperSneakySniper you are totally right. i apologize i did let anger get the best of me.
elmajiko420 7 months ago
@elmajiko420 haha no problem bro, Just keep shooting
SuperSneakySniper 7 months ago
@elmajiko420
Yes, he was an idiot. Both for messing with drugs and the bad things he did afterwards. The family did all we could. Our mother (the "bitch," as you put it) turned him in to the police (one year in prison) and I offered him alternatives (job, home, etc). Nothing changed his mindset or behavior.
stewartx5 7 months ago
Comment removed
bb152005 7 months ago
@RebelGuy95 You have explained it very well -- the second amendment means that the military has a right to have guns. Otherwise they would have to defend the country with sling shots :-) Stupid is the correct term. You got it right. Sotomayor is stupid. Ditto the people who support her position.
Anyhow, the right to defend yourself doesn't come from government; it's our right as living, breathing human beings. All people have the right to defend themselves.
nemo227 8 months ago
if you really love your weapons buy extra and hide them dont register them either
buy as much ammo as you can afford and bury it, then get equipment to reload your empty casings. another good idea is to create a militia so the government cant touch your organazations weapons have it so your are protected under the second amendment no matter what the supreme court rules
101crazys 9 months ago
It no longer matters, the supreme court has spoken. The second amendment confers an INDIVIDUAL RIGHT. The argument is over.
MrMZaccone 9 months ago
@MrMZaccone Unfortunately, that doesn't mean we can't be hassled for it, every day for our entire lives by a corrupt legal system that doesn't always enforce the laws, and instead enforces their interpretation of them.
ajlepisto 8 months ago
@ajlepisto A man must be willing to fight this bullshit in the court system. That's how the recent ruling came about in the first place.
MrMZaccone 8 months ago
You do know the justices can be impeached and removed from the supreme court. One was impeached for his federalist leaning.
From some of the decision that are be handed down on the second amendment you would think four justices are twisting the constitution to fit their own beliefs and/or taking orders from the president.
samten10a 9 months ago
Comment removed
KalashnikovKid762 10 months ago
ban guns
gape2011 10 months ago
FUCK GUNS! Tell these Charlton Heston NRA cock suckers to put up their hands and FIGHT! only pussies use guns!!!
WatWarrior22 10 months ago
Commies are taking over our society. They could not do it with military might. So they went underground.
Are you spineless libs ok with that?
seeingthesigns 10 months ago
Although I mostly don't like Fox news, I will admit that they actually had a point when they pointed out Sotomayor's insane views on gun control. I hope people see the truth and hopefully she'll somehow lose her commission as a justice later on.
MudaSHoleProductions 11 months ago
* Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the Journal of Quantitative Criminology,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.
lobo9er 11 months ago
Cant believe this stupid bitch is a justice (oxymoron)
Denverlibertarion 1 year ago
Gun control exists for one purpose only... Disarming and weakening law abiding citizens.
Denverlibertarion 1 year ago
@Denverlibertarion don't mention crazy people, repeat offenders, fellins, and domestic terrorists. but that is beside the point, they are taken away my right to have a weapon. i have quiet the armory myself but these laws are in place to keep guns away from people who can't handle a gun or will kill people with it.
happyorks1 11 months ago
@happyorks1 Didn't stop the Columbine killers. They violated 16 gun control laws. So much for communism.
Denverlibertarion 11 months ago
@Denverlibertarion just because it is a law doesn't mean it is going it work. i am 100% sure that if they outlawed guns altogether you are going to not forfeit your guns easily. so if a killer is going to kill, they are not going to use a legal gun, that is retarded, you get a untraceable, illegal gun so the police can't track you so easily. communism is a deferent argument altogether, one that is unwinable by either of us because it's an argument about politics, politics sucks, inquisition FTW
happyorks1 11 months ago
@happyorks1 You wrote:just because it is a law doesn't mean it is going it work. so if a killer is going to kill, they are not going to use a legal gun.
So why should we make it difficult for a law abiding citizen to get one? If the killers are going to kill they'll get one anyway. Doesn't make a difference whether the stone hits the glass or the glass hits the stone, it aint gonna hurt the stone. I feel safer knowing fellow law abiding citizens are armed than not armed and some psycho is.
Denverlibertarion 11 months ago
@Denverlibertarion we don't know if you are law abiding, we take that on faith, the government isn't allowed to have faith. how long are you planning to be that way? are you going to rob a store with that gun? kill your wife? or use it for self-defends? not everyone has the same moral compass and ambitions. we wouldn't need a weapon if that was the case
happyorks1 11 months ago
@happyorks1 But why worry when I can get it from Homie G and his crew. Thats what people do in Chicago now that guns are outlawed. A lot of good that did.
Denverlibertarion 11 months ago
@Denverlibertarion "just because it is a law doesn't mean it is going it work."
happyorks1 11 months ago
@happyorks1 Which is exaclty why we dont need gun control. Let citizens be armed in defense.
Denverlibertarion 10 months ago
@Denverlibertarion well either way it doesn't apply to me because i have blades, and training to use the blades. no reloading, no jams, just a wet stone and a cloth to keep me cutin'.
happyorks1 10 months ago
@happyorks1 Ever heard of "Don't bring a knife to a gun fight"? Your knife will do nothing for you when faced with a criminal with a gun. You will get in much more trouble in most U.S. states if you stab someone with a knife instead of shooting them with a gun (for protection).
bb152005 7 months ago
@bb152005 if someone is going to rob me with a gun, they WILL be stupid enough to do it at point blank range, that means within my cuntin' range.
knock gun out of your face and grab wrist with a C-block.
unsheathe knife with free hand.
bring knife to offender's neck.
say "The Blood god will be pleased with you" and smile.
make a small cut on there face.
break arm with a downard fist strike with the hilt of knife.
let go of hand.
i don't think he will be much trouble after that.
happyorks1 7 months ago
@happyorks1 Well, if this was Hollywood, then this might work. For those of us older than 5 years old, then no. Why would a guy have a gun if he is going to stick it in your face? Most robbers are going to come in your house, and shoot you as soon as they see you. People like me are prepared, and practice to shoot better than the criminal. He will shoot someone like you from across the room. Your imagination is fun, but it doesn't work in real life.
bb152005 7 months ago
@bb152005 have you ever thought maybe i have practiced a lot of marshal arts? ninjutsu (japan), taijutsu (japan), krav (Israel), ti quan do (Korea), kendo (japan), and a general "Art of War". and yes it does work. i was working at a convince store and a guy with tries to rob me, i brake his writs with a nagamora strike, and scare the shit out of him. yes this shit works. guns are a great tool but relying on your piece is a great to get yourself killed. "a gun with no bullets is a glorified club"
happyorks1 7 months ago
@happyorks1 Well, stand a hundred yards from a guy with a gun, and lets see who wins. If you do that, then I wont be expecting a reply. How old are you? You didn't even pay attention in school when they were teaching you how to spell, so I doubt you took any other classes to teach you fighting. Keep living in fantasy land buddy. I'm not responding to you anymore, because you are an idiot.
bb152005 7 months ago
@bb152005 boy, trying to find someone to debate with is fucking hard. they always think your trolling, i know a gun is preferable to a knife at 100 yard. unless you are in gangland or Afghanistan, they will try to rob you, JUST rob, you no one wants to add first degree murder. 猿野郎 Japanese is my first langue dick
happyorks1 7 months ago
If guns are ever outlawed, I will be an outlaw. If I get arrested 10 times for illegally having a firearm, then so be it. Id rather be tried by 12 and go to prison, then watch somebody hurt my wife, steall all my shit, and kill me.
xDONTxTREADxONxMEx 1 year ago
it looks like THEY are trying to create civil unrest in order to cause an up rising among the American people so they can declare marshal law and limit the rights that we have as Americans. if i was big government and that were my goal i would go after the 2nd amendment for a few reasons.reason 1 an unarmed public could not fight for there rights . reason 2 the love of our 2nd amendment right spans most groups races and genders.
keverc 1 year ago
If we dont defend the 2nd amendment then we will never be able to defend anything else. i feel it will be a sad day the day they try to disarm the American people .how ever one of the things i love most about america and the people who live here is that amercans wont just lay down and give up our rights.
keverc 1 year ago
I thought the bill of rights was about indivisual right? So why isnt their 2nd amendment the same?
1ohtaf1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This comment is directed toward Sotomayor.
Seems to me that you haven't learned from the past. You would think that with Germany's past, you would learn from history. The last time I checked, when citizens were barred from owning firearms, millions of Jews died. The Nazi's weren't so successful when it came to cleaning out the Warsaw ghetto. Maybe that is why Israel has adopted the slogan, "Never Again!"
The SS deserved your trust Ja?
WenchesOfRedemption 1 year ago
The point is this. THE PEOPLE. These two words are at the beginging of the contitution and have a meaning. That meaning does not change in the 2nd amendment. THE PEOPLE. If any judge denies that right, then they have ruled against the whole contitution. In other words, who decides whom THE PEOPLE are? What if a judge says the that the people are the whites, or indians, etc. Any right that use the words THE PEOPLE mean a right of all the PEOPLE. This could start the next armed revolution.
tock101 1 year ago
can someone explain why she thinks that the 2nd Amendment applies to the federal govt. and not the citizens? that makes absolutely no sense. the Bill of Rights was added because anti-Federalists feared that citizens' rights would have been trampled after the Federalists passed the Constitution. that's why the Bill of Rights was passed, to protect the individual citizens' rights, NOT the federal government.
too408 1 year ago
The Right of The People to Keep & Bear Arms Shall Not Be Infringed. Read the WHOLE amendment stupid bitch
VinnyS914 1 year ago 3
i hope she gets home invaded and raped silly because she dosent own a gun
ecosby100 1 year ago 2
@ecosby100 lol who would tuch that with out a 10' pole
1s1ksniper1 1 year ago
If she believes a state can overrule a constitutional right, ie: they have the authority to regulate to the point of not allowing ownership of firearms, what would she then say when a state decides to say, "we have no regulation of our citizens in this state?" My guess is that would be time for her to say the feds have authority to overrule the state.
impeachobamasass 1 year ago 2
Hey sotomayor, I have a ruling for you. You'r radical leftist opinions no longer matter. You as a communist are impotent like the rest of your party. Don't like my attitude? Get out of my country.
biscottibob 1 year ago 3
@biscottibob Hahahah she's not a communist, she's a $#%@ idiot LOL!
TheFirearmEnthusiast 1 year ago
why are people so stupid. we have the right not the liberty to own and BEAR arms. period. its a right that means it is unalienable. you either give your right away or you keep on chugging. if its your right that means no registration, no jumping through hoops. its your right, and if a law infringes upon your right it is emediately null and void. we are americans, we arm ourselves, this is between you and your god not you and your government. liberty does not=right, get it through your heads
88HolyDiver 1 year ago 2
Yesterday 64 million registered gun owners didn't kill anyone.
SPAD58 1 year ago 8
1903 constitution hahaha were in 2010...The united states has to wake up!!
ic069 1 year ago
i didnt know the constitution only aplyed to some people. banning guns is unconstitutional
sovietninja3 1 year ago
The law is clear. Individual citizens have the God-given right to bear arms...
novarod 1 year ago
@VERGIS92- America was armed with nuclear weapons in WWII and during which time dropped the only A-bombs ever in a war on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Nuclear weapons have not in any way made the world more stable. If anything, they have led to the chaotic and impulsive spending of yours, mine, and mainly Russian tax dollars in a crazed race for militaristic power, a virtue that may seem intertwined with stability, but as we have seen has only led to a reality which is far from anything stable.
Verbalmint 2 years ago
@Verbalmint are you crazy?
if it wenrt for nukes it would be world war 6 right now!
jebustheone 2 years ago 3
My point is that having reasonable nuclear arsenal is one thing- most developed nations have a couple hundred for their own protection- England has around 250 for example. But the U.S. has long ago hit the point of diminishing returns- where building more nukes ends up becoming a waste time, money and resources; and that craze for neo-consveritism displayed by the U.S. has not only led to much blow back, but has just dumped fuel on a fire we should be trying to put out, not make bigger.
Verbalmint 2 years ago
@Verbalmint just wanna remind you that the only offensive nuclear weapons use in the history of man was by the democrats. Not the army, not the 'neo-cons', the democrats.
The US and Russia have been downsizing their nuke stocks for years. Unfortunately nukes have a 'use by date' and need to be replaced, that's a fact.
jebustheone 2 years ago
In my original comment I never said I disagreed with Truman's decision to drop the a-bomb (although I do still disagree with the target choices and eagerness to launch it). But Vergis92 is right, it did end the war and very likely saved lives.
But the damage from those two bombs, compared to how many thousands were already dropped, was so high and caused the Japanese to surrender in one day means that you don't need many of them to make your point.
Verbalmint 2 years ago
Before the first Russian nuclear warhead was built the U.S. already had 4,000+ war heads. It took the Russians 20 years to become equal with us in stockpile size, which, when they did was about 25,000.
In Russia and in the U.S. there are less than 300 cities with a population greater than 100,000 people.
Around 1965, at our stockpile's peak, we had close to 35,000 warheads, while the Russians only had about 6,000. And at the Russian's peak they had a staggering 45,000 warheads.
Verbalmint 2 years ago
@Verbalmint actually when satcom was created there was only 9 atomic bombs in existence and before actuall warheads even existed for missiles the soviets had caught up and for a period were in fact ahead during their sputnik launches before it crashed
spartanunoob 1 year ago
@spartanunoob Ok, well an overly excessive amount of warheads, whether they were for missles or not, is still a gross misplacement of our tax dollars in my mind. I am not saying we should not invest in national defense; I am saying that we need to remain balanced and reasonable in everything we do. If you were the soviets, I bet you would be pretty alarmed when your "enemy" (at the time the U.S.) had 4k+ nuclear warheads and you had 0. I wonder how things would have gone if we both started at 0.
Verbalmint 1 year ago
@Verbalmint me too and the apache attack helicopters are supposed to get 2 or 3 million dollars worth of upgrades so the best army on the planet has to spend all its money so we can be even deadlier its way overkill man so many better ways we could use the money
spartanunoob 1 year ago
Comment removed
Verbalmint 1 year ago
@Verb What those bombs did do is stop the Japanese from killing, raping, enslaving and starving untold millions in China, the Pacific Islands and South East Asia. Since that time, Japan has never attempted another attack, and have no ability to do so. No other country has ever attempted to form a nuclear attack against us. So I would say, Yup, in a nuclear way. It stabilized the world at that time. And militaristic power is the only power powers respond to. Wake up
charlitunaman2002 2 years ago
Read my second to last post- I don't disagree with the decision to drop.
Verbalmint 2 years ago
I live in an area full of immigrants and potentially lethal criminals among them, yet it is one of the areas where there's zero burglaries, almost no crime, why
do you think that is? because 1 in 3 citizens does have an illegal handgun, and the absolute will to use it, the last criminal to attempt a house burglary was shot dead by
a 90 year old WW2 veteran, a seemingly 'easy'
victim to rob
VERGIS92 2 years ago
cars are invented and designed to drive, guns are invented and designed to kill
BusterXXXL 2 years ago
@BusterXXXL In part yes, but also they have a deterrent force, you need to count how many lives guns have saved, and how many criminals they have dererred, it is also a fact that neclear weapons have made the world a more stable place, and have saved 100 times more lives than they killed, sounds hard to believe? If America was nuclearly armed in WWII, the japanese wouldn't even think to attack, or draw US to war, how many soldiers
would have survived??
VERGIS92 2 years ago
Shannon Bream is really hot, she got my attention right away! with reporters like her I can watch news all day
VERGIS92 2 years ago
guns have made many societies safer, much like nuclear weapons have averted many wars, they act as deterrent power. If you remove guns criminals will resort to knives and killer shooters will resort to bow and arrow, and these are harder to trace in crimes
VERGIS92 2 years ago
not to mention much less lethal. I would prefer arguing with a drunk thats armed with a knife anytime above arguing one with a gun. And bow and arrow harder to trace in crimes? O_o
BusterXXXL 2 years ago
@BusterXXXL Nope, statistically you are MUCH more likely to survive a shooting than a stabbing, it's common sense really.
jebustheone 2 years ago
Please give me a hint, where I could find THAT statistic.
Common sense? Sounds more like some peace out of tinfoilhat-land, where facts dont count.
BusterXXXL 2 years ago
How can someone so stupid graduate from Princeton?
boscogump 2 years ago
@boscogump how could they not be stupid?
migkillertwo 2 years ago
5-4? it should have been 9-0. We have the individual right to bear arms I would rather be considered a criminal for owning a firearm for self defense than be defenseless.
Noahthebeast09 2 years ago
this is how i see it
say were together and im holding a knife. are there any circumstances where plunging that knife into your chest would actually help you instead of kill you on the spot?
what if im a surgeon and you have cancer and im operating right now because if i operate right now i can get it all but if i wait then it will spread and kill you. then a tool possible of great injury can help you instead. guns are like that. misused they kill innocents.used correctly they can save innocents
randomperson8888 2 years ago 3
god damn, me, agreeing with fox, that is very, very strange.
GearsofFate101 2 years ago
Isn't sotomayor a member of la RAZA, the "pure race". Remember Hitler had to push gun control to do his thing. sotomayor is a member of the 'pure race' and her desire to push gun control is a good hint to what she really wants to do. ;)
kronosgyros 2 years ago
groundhog you are such a typical liberal that cant mind their own business and wants to control everyone else,.I would bet that you are an unattractive female that can't get a man and you blame everyone else for your lonely life predicament .HOT TIP try working out put on some make up and stop your incessant bitching and control freak attitude
wosked 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I do not believe that a person should be able to get a license to carry a gun. I mean, what are they protecting?? It just seems like they have something to be scared of, or they wouldnt be carrying a gun!!
groundhog2008 2 years ago
apparently you are 6 yrs old and you dont understand how the world works yet but gun owners get guns to protect the lives of themselves and their family members. criminals have guns. law abiding citizens have a god given right to protect themselves and their property. POLICE ARE NOT REQUIRED BY LAW TO PROTECT CITIZENS. their job is to take pictures of victims and then find the bad guy. WE MUST DEFEND OURSELVES. 2nd_Amendment forever !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
PrinceVegeta1984 2 years ago
groundhog2008, Tell me, do you wear a seatbelt in your car? What are you protecting? What are you scared of?
ClassicFIHD 2 years ago
Well I'll give you a real good reason right now, watch this.
watch?v=nu5j8C2Hrc0
fengineer08 2 years ago
Well, my step mother's life was saved when a man in a parking lot threatened her with a blunt instrument.
Criminals who do not obey rape or murder laws don't care about gun laws so gun control only affects people who care about the law an example would be my step mother.
Noahthebeast09 2 years ago
Sorry about the Christian youth kids attacking you. Most christians are good people though.
Noahthebeast09 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
We need gun control!! I was in a home improvement store lately. When the guy next to me leaned over to look at something, I saw a gun under his jacket. I quickly notified store management. They refused to do anything, saying that he was a regular customer, and that there was no rules about not taking a concealed gun into the store. I told them that if it were properly concealed, I wouldnt have seen it. Anyway, they said that what he was doing was fine. It still makes me nervous!!
groundhog2008 2 years ago
if we die then so be it at least we go done fighting for the world that god gave us!!!!!!
sparuto117 2 years ago
they are tring to take away the only thang that we can deffend against them!!!!!!!!!!!
these ass holes are not for the people they don't care about us
lets take america back and our rights that they are tring to take!!!!!!!!!!!!
sparuto117 2 years ago 17
@sparuto117 i concur with your statement good sir
blorgyboy 1 year ago
@sparuto117 dude I hate to burst your bubble but if the gov wanted to and could get the pple to go along with it, you guns would not help against our military. You would die long before you ever herd or knew they were at your door.
AquaticLD50 1 year ago
@AquaticLD50 Thats intresting. Thinck about it. The majority of people in the military are pro gun. So are ther families. They are befinitely more right wing then left and they would definitely fight for our rights before they fight against them. At least thats how it should be.
sandbagguy 1 year ago
@AquaticLD50 have u never watched the movie red dawn or heard the story of the soviet occupation of afghanistan using guerilla warfare and if u had any number of people u could hit and run and keep up a sustantial war inside of occupied territory and in that case it dosent matter if the army blows u away who wants to live in a world where u are not free and were we can be forced to do things by a tyrannical government that is the real point of the 2nd ammendment to resist tyranny at all costs
spartanunoob 1 year ago
@spartanunoob Yes I have seen red dawn, and read all about the soviet occup. of afghan. I understand that guerilla warfare is very effective...and I understand that the 2nd amendment was put there to keep a tyrannical gov from comeing to power (failing so far imo) but what I was saying was that if the gov had a fully functioning military (saying most didnt leave) an insurection would get crushed.
AquaticLD50 1 year ago
@AquaticLD50 yeah but the thing is i understand their extremely large advantage but for the last nine years we have been hunting for osama and his terrorists and they are in a damn hole somewhere and we have yet to gain full victory so i dont think it would be crushed if everyone didnt gather into a small room so they could bomb us lol
spartanunoob 1 year ago
I find you to be the typical liberal.
"We have a problem - health care, so lets just give it everyone
When the FFA went from private to federal, delays increased, etc.
competition between airports occured when it was private... then competion disappeared.
Obama wants to reform health care (good idea, better than 'change') but because O's a commy, he decides that the bill is gonna tax rich people. Not gonna work, this is why we are in recession, because americans are taxed to much
Vader12Tater12 2 years ago
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." -Benjamin Franklin
edicol 2 years ago 2
Democracy is a form of government and compared to others it allows more freedom. More than socialism, monarchy, etc. But it is not perfect but there is nothing better. Democracy must be supplemented with a system to protect the individual from the mob or else the mob will simply vote to have certain individual's rights violated. Checks and balances.
kronosgyros 2 years ago
can you agree with democracy and not democratics?
randomperson8888 2 years ago
Do you even know what La Raza is??
If I was forced to side with this sophie person, I would definitely side with her now...
and sophie, liberal idiots are ruing this country. CAUSE WE NEED A SMALL GOVERNMENT!!!!! not a freakin' obamapire
Vader12Tater12 2 years ago
'Vader12...', you are BRAINWASHED! We will never have a truly small government because our capitalist system is NOT perfect, so we NEED a given amount of government to serve the people in a good way. But of course, your puny, infantile, simpleton mind cannot grasp this basic fact. Europeans who have single payer systems consider themselves conservative because they care about their fellow man enough to insure they all get proper healthcare access. They don't dabble in trillion dollar wars!
sophiegromit 2 years ago
yes, i lived in the UK for 4 years and experienced the marvel of social healthcare.... IT F'N SUCKED! My friend broke his arm, doc said "come back in three days and we'll put a cast on it, in the meantime, here's a pillow to make a sling.
Aquantaince gets cancer: has to wait two months BEFORE SHE EVEN GETS TO SEE THE ECONOLOGIST!
Private health care... Get a cast within an hour. See the Econlogist within a week.
Cooperation can only get you so far. you need competition
Vader12Tater12 2 years ago 2
You're a LIAR! I've lived in Germany, Greece, and Canada thus far in my 47 years, and in all those countries, the healthcare I received was efficient and top-notch. And I didn't have to pay a cent. I had an appendix removed in Athens, was treated for Crohn's disease in Canada, and had my heart meds changed while in Germany. There are far too many Americans NOT getting the care they need, because they cannot afford the super expensive procedures and/or insurance here. Many are losing homes.
sophiegromit 2 years ago
YOU'RE LYING TO YOURSELF!!!
I broke my thumb in the UK, but because I was American, the my government paid for me to go see a hand specialist within a week.
there you go, if you're in a foreign country, you're home government is gonna take care of you. Working abroad helps them, so it's not an all give situation.
I'm gonna post another comment, so read that one too....
Vader12Tater12 2 years ago
Liar, Just wait till you get REAL sick. Then you'll be in trouble.
BTW, in Massachusetts Maine and California where they have that crap, people wait in line forever and doctors have no say in treatment for patients. The burecrats are the only ones who will benefit.
mainestategop 2 years ago
no you are the liar, there are far too many americans without insurance getting top notch rapid car because many hospitals policy is to turn no one away.
kronosgyros 2 years ago
Modern-day capitalism has devolved into globalism that has siphoned off considerable wealth away from the U.S. Government is needed more than ever, and this does not equate to pure Socialism. You desperate right wing nutjobs are so naive.
sophiegromit 2 years ago
By the way, I AM a gun owner.
sophiegromit 2 years ago
You are one SICK MORON! It's hatemongering, uneducated dolts like you that are ruining this country!
sophiegromit 2 years ago
Support the NRA and join. Help fight against tyranny.
Halo2100 2 years ago
Obama = FREEDOM and PROGRESS
sophiegromit 2 years ago
Obama = economic recession in another 30 years
socialism isn't progress, it's quite backward. And gun control leads to more violence. If everyone had a gun, I bet criminals would think twice about robbing a house
Vader12Tater12 2 years ago
It's beyond pathetic how so many of you uneducated simpleton morons overuse the word 'Socialism', not knowing what it means! We, as well as most other contemporary western democracies (Europe, Australia, Canada, etc.) have a 'mixed economy' consisting of government to serve the people and free markets. Our government pays for police and firefighters, yet I don't hear you 'cry Socialism'! Government is NOT the problem... we NEED many government organizations like the FAA, FTC, FCC, FDA, etc.
sophiegromit 2 years ago
you're pathetic... socialsim is bad... a completely capitalist society would be the best and healthiest
BUT!!! You fail to take into account that the constitution says the government will provide basics. (and to prove that I know what socialism is, you twit, Karl Marx invented the idea of Public Education....)
the governemt needs to regulate pretty much nothing, just what can harm us (like bad food, hence the FDA) but they do not need to have their fingers in every little thing
Vader12Tater12 2 years ago
'Vader12', you are brainwashed and deluded bigtime. A complete Capitalist society with minimal government laws and intervention would be disastrous, given the fact that faceless corporations don't have our best interests in mind. We flawed humans will always checks and balances provided by government and laws to make our lives easier and more moral. 'Mixed economies' will always be the rule.
sophiegromit 2 years ago
Dee dee dee...
you're a retard, i said that. mixed economy (like 70% captialist and 30% gov) is what we need... Capitalism = diversity = good. BUT!!! (read this time) we need the FDA to make sure people are not selling us food with E Coli in it..., etc
the government's job is to make sure we are safe and free. Not to give us health care, welfare (a good idea, but it needs to be more heavily regulated for it to actually be a legitimate good idea), etc
Vader12Tater12 2 years ago
'Vader12...' you are an ignoramus. Do us all a favor and spare us your tired, canned Limbaugh rants about government. The truth is government is sizeable in any contemporary western nation like the U.S., despite which party is in office. You mention the words 'safe' and 'free', yet obviously you know not the true meaning of those words. We are not safe, nor are we free if nearly 50 million of us do not have health insurance! The Canadians understand. Europe understands. We don't.
sophiegromit 2 years ago
Sotomayor on Roe v Wade is settled law , Sotomayor was evasive when asked about whether gun ownership is a fundamental right when she stated I'm not taking an opinion on that issue, because it's an open question. What? If Roe v Wade is settled the 2nd amendment should be as well but not in the mind of Sotomayor. Sotomayor will definitely boost gun and ammo sales as in a recent article it stated "Hand guns and the tactical weapons, sales they're absolutely off the charts.
dkkght46 2 years ago
Check this out: I don't care what the law says. Me being a law abiding citizen, I will get a gun. And if liberals or the government has problem with that then I'll put a few of them 6 feet under.
STeroidsnicca 2 years ago 30
the year: 2026
"I wish bill and jane had a gun the other night when those 2 illegals broke in and shot bill, stole their belongings and then raped jane."
" So do I honey. it's a shame that our 2nd amendment rights were taken away back in 2010 by obama and his leftist lackies."
"Perhaps in enough community destroying tragedies like this happen, the government will give us our rights back."
"No honey, i think they are gone forever."
"I wish we had never voted for obama in the first place."
PrinceVegeta1984 2 years ago
The broader issue is that Judge SoSo thinks that the Constitution is not binding upon the individual states. We are truly viewing an inferior legal mind.
kenp3L 2 years ago 2
Soto is a genuine traitor. She also ruled in favor of discrimination against white people by government employers, which is also unconstitutional. She hates white people and our rights, so naturally Obama digs her up and crowns her.
chowbelly 2 years ago 4
The beauty of the revolution was the realization of the PEOPLE to govern themselves. The people realized they can change WHICHEVER laws they want that match the needs and wants of the people best and that they do not have to live by the laws of a few chimerical fantasists in government.
ThePeacefulResistor 2 years ago 2
All you have to do is Dance on the Head of every letter written to make a new law. This is outrageous Law was made to Liberate not to Regulate. no matter what we do, the laws will be re worded and will walk circles around the constitution, with just a little lie mixed in, can make the whole truth Good for absolutely nothing. mixing the Constitution with personal opinion.
DarkSifu 2 years ago 2
So there we have it, this is why the Obamanation picked her.
rayme4raw 2 years ago
If Obama is re-elected, you can kiss your freedom goodbye.
minutemenlive 2 years ago 3
Basically I guess they are says the new judge is going to bring mass civil unrest sooner?
These judges shitting on the Constitution will experience Karma someday ...
ben5017 2 years ago 2
fuck this bitch. she wants to take our guns away
realdeal119 2 years ago 3
Thi