McDonald v. Chicago: An Exclusive Heritage Foundation Interview

[treid100182]

I hope Chicago wins.

[hockeyslade]

@treid100182 why would you say such a foolish thing?

[jhunted7667]

years ago in Connecticut your pistol permit said that ( the person named has a legal right to carry pistols and revolcers in this state , they took that off that off the permit now they say that it is a privilege I asked

[jhunted7667]

read Connecticut laws , it used to be that you had to be a fellon to be denied a gun NOW connecticut law states that if you protest and the police arrest you ,you resist even verbally you are a rioter and with a misdemeanor charge they can take your guns they have added alot of unconstitutional laws I think that someone should look into it with money willing to fight

[VinnyS914]

Does anyone notice what I do? Gun opponants NEVER ask legislators to pass harsh laws against criminals or elevate mandatory minimum sentences for criminals that use guns. They ONLY target legal gun owners.

[Cstrife234]

I would say this is a win, but it's only half of the battle. The other half is that he's only allowed to assert his "right" under the 14th Amendment, because if you have any adhesion contracts with the government, you're not a sovereign citizen in right, but in privledge as guaranteed by the 14th. That stupid amendment also accounts for blacks and any minorities. It should be re-written like, "All men and women born in a State are citizens of that state and by the 9th and 10th are considered

[mallardhead]

The Bill of Rights is certainly a part of the FedGovt, but its there because it reflects Rights demanded by the People of that Govt. Those same People populate the states, cities and everywhere. Common Sense says it applies there as well. Good job!

[Cstrife234]

@mallardhead Well yeah, the founding fathers made the bill of rights and the constitution and likewise they were sent to the colonies/states for the people, because it does state that the 9th and 10th assert personal sovereignty being born in the republic of their state and because of that they are automatically Americans by right. Think of each state as its own country in a union of states (United States), as the countries in the United Kingdom are. Or the European Union with its members.

[mallardhead]

@Cstrife234

Lol at your patient, "Well yeah..." ..I KNOW all that quite well! ..I don't KNOW why 'automatic American rights' had to go before the court. .. (I do, really! The Hundred + Years Mollification of the Nation by those who'd end such rights. I'm just angry!) .. I understand our structure but will never equate it (a Republic) to the UK (a modified parliamentarian/monarchy) or the EU ( a modified dictatorship) because of the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

[Cstrife234]

@mallardhead Basically, states are republics of sovereign individuals. On the Illinois Seal from 1818 "State Sovereignty, National Union". We are not subjects, voluntary or involuntary to the Federal Government Corporation. We are sovereigns by the grace of our creator (god,architect,nature, etc). Our rights are not given by, but enumerated in the Bill of Rights and Constitution and its high time we take the republic back. People, learn about your rights to assemble grand jury (26).

[mallardhead]

@Cstrife234

That's what's supposed to be. The FedGovt has been intruding on that from the start, more so in the last 100 years. .. as they have been withering away the 'God' concept.. So WHY do We have to sue for those rights now? .. Something is wrong and We do need to fix it. .. Got a plan for a fix and restoration of the Republic?

[Cstrife234]

@mallardhead Well, the founding fathers were freemasons. That's obvious in so many ways. A lot of the constitution itself was based off of law in Deuteronomy, established in common law, and documents like the magna carta. The creator, or divine architect is whatever you consider it to be, personally. To some people, that's nature itself (aka natural rights). Either way, we're given rights by creation and not by government, or paper. If I can i'll link you to a site about restoring the republic.

[mallardhead]

@Cstrife234

Only 9 of the 56 who signed the Declaration and about 19 of the 55 who signed the Constitution were Freemasons. Most were not. ..Most were 'improper' Christians, bound by the Bible but free thinking on the Word and unbound by doctrine/dogma. .. Common Law was their focus, more than anything else. .. Jefferson stripped what he considered Myth from Jesus the Man and devoted himself to Him. ..Look forward to the link..

[Cstrife234]

@mallardhead I meant the ones we really think about, but you're right. I believe Jesus to have been a man as well. He claims over and over to be the son of man. I'm glad to see a knowledgeable person without malice or pride.

[mallardhead]

@Cstrife234

LOL! I was full of malice and pride, religious and national, but a single circumstance made me throw out the church and the govt. I've been rebuilding my life ever since, trusting neither to tell the truth. ..So you know the significance of 'son of man'? ..and ..Have you seen the beer commercial that makes the founding fathers look like 'good old boys'?

[Cstrife234]

@mallardhead I meant, malice and pride at me xD

Yes, I have. You ought to send me emails here, instead of comments...otherwise this video will be full of us. lol

[mallardhead]

@Cstrife234

It may as well be full of us as it is not collecting a lot of other comments and here is where we will attract even more folk... Can you imagine Martin Luther King Jr. in a Schlitz Malt Liquor commercial eating chitlins? Or imagine Hector P Garcia, who set up LULAC, in a Mexican beer commercial, eating tacos? Blacks and Hispanics would be enraged!

[jhunted7667]

@mallardhead  well John Handcock , the biggest signature on the Declaration of Independence was a whiskey smuggler if that helps you , but as for the Church you can turn your back on it because alot of churches are corrupt just don't turn your back on God , he brought me back from the dead , you may need his help sometime

[mallardhead]

@jhunted7667

Joseph Kennedy made most of his money running booze in Prohibition, too! Was it for the principle of freedom or the chance to get money that both men bucked the law? Kennedy wanted to buy his way into the blue blood society! What about Hancock?.. And, no, I did not reject God, just the Church. When the dust settled He was there ready to get to the real work of Truth!

[jhunted7667]

@Cstrife234 the freemasons here were inflitatred in 1778 by illuminati bankers

where do you think the money came from to build Washington DC , the money was given with the understanding that the bankers should have a say in the layout of the city ,b the founding fathers at that time had no Idea what was going on the Banker was French the French helped us win the war , who knew

[wynboniface]

Go kill the NFA 34, GCA 68, FOPA 86, and the import bans!

[DavyCrockett2]

@wynboniface

Amen to that!

[jonilsen351]

Yes! I am so pleased words can't describe it. Now, don't forget to vote! Gun ownership goes up, crime goes down. Proven fact. Gun control isn't about guns it's about control. Gun control is life insurance for those scheming to steal the rest of our bill of rights.

[pat97vette]

"Maryland Shall Issue" needs you!

[nthamix]

There is a God...

[edavismookie25]

@nthamix Amen. We have to take our government back.

[truckindawg1]

GOD BLESS OTIS MCDONALD AND EVERYONE ELSE WHO MADE THIS RULING POSSIBLE !!!!!!!!! Finally ( whenever this takes effect ) we in California can finally tell counties like Santa Cruz county that I demand my ccw permit!!!

One of the most limp wristed counties in California. I'll take my permit now please mr sheriff !!!!

[penguinistas]

Thank you Mr McDonald for standing up to the Chicago political machine to take back your rights. Mayors banning guns from the insulated safety of their walled mansions really don't care about the little people they pretend to serve.

[VinnyS914]

@penguinistas It's called HYPOCRISY. We have an asshiole in my jurisdiction that is so anti gun it's disgusting. There's a video of the piece of shit firing an MP5 (which is reserved only for law enforcement in many jurisdictions) I thought guns were all bad, liberal fuck.

[SWATsnip3r]

COME TO NY!!!

[screwopenborders]

@SWATsnip3r It applies to NY too.

[edavismookie25]

@SWATsnip3r It's on its way!

[MotionFrequency]

The ones that want to take your guns away are the ones that want to enslave everyone and the world. They are terrified of the people, the little ones, they love to step on and use us like a kleenex. Liberals love big government, dependence on government for everything in your life, security, health, food, checks and they basically want to control. If you have a weapon and say no, they have a problem with that because you are standing up to them. How dare you stand, your a regular person.

[edavismookie25]

@MotionFrequency AMEN! AMEN!

[DUKEBOOTY14]

LONG LIVE OTIS MCDONALD!!!

[762BR]

Shame it was a 5-4 decision. Should have been 9-0.

Nevertheless, Alan Gura, you are my hero! :D

[RightWingTV]

The bigger news is the 5-4 decision. Do we really have 4 Supreme Court Justices who believe Chicago's gun ban law is Constitutional ? Wow ! It is amazing how we, as Americans, stay so calm, collected, and reserved, when a handful of politcal hacks at the Supreme Court can decide if we keep or lose our liberties and freedoms.

[Civsuccess2]

Guns don't kill people, people do.

Similarly, guns don't threat people, people do.

Guns cannot commit crimes nor can they threat people. People who have the intention of committing the crime can use anything as weapons including guns and knifes.

[geargemartin]

i mean no offence........but i never saw an individual who would benefit more from owning a hand gun than Mr. Gottlieb...

[altops]

the out come is good, the fact it was only by one vote is abhorrent, this should have been a straight across blowout. But some commie judges have yet to gain this post, then forget it flush the whole country down the chitter.

[helltrackrider]

@altops

agree...if the words "government ban" and "gun" are in the same case; the answer should be 9-0 for the 2nd Amendment...

Cant wait until this internationalist ideolog Kagan gets appointed; now...we will be ruling by citing international case law rather than SCOTUS case law...

[freesk8]

The best thing about this decision was that the winning vote, that of Clarence Thomas, was made because Thomas appealed to the privileges and immunities clause of the 14th amendment. This is a major victory for individual rights and the principle of liberty. Yay, Justice Thomas!!!

[Yakko77]

5-4. WAAAAY too close. Our Freedom shouldn't hang in the balance by one vote.

[helltrackrider]

@Yakko77

bright side, now that this ruling came about...should it ever come again to the SCOTUS...those who vote against it can all be shot and the verdict will be unanimous towards the 2nd Amendment.

[barthunt1]

@Yakko77, I agree....