you're reading...
agenda, annoyance, California, common sense, Constitution, courts, customer service, errors-in-judgement, evil, gun control, history, lost culture, progressive, rant, tyranny

Say WHAT?

aka ¿Que?

Federal Judge Says No Second Amendment Right To Own Firearms

Federal Judge Kimberly J. Mueller, an Obama appointee, said in a decision on Thursday that the Second Amendment does not apply to firearms.

You should really go and read the whole thing.  Bring your airsick bag.

The judge is an Obama appointee.

Quelle surprise.

Let’s see…The President of The United States, who was previously titled as a ‘Constitutional Law Professor’ (spits at the incredulity), appoints a like-minded sycophant to the bench, who doles out ridiculous tripe like this to further the progressive agenda of civilian disarmament.

I know The President’s school records are sealed.  (This from the most open administration, ever!)  Have any of his former students come forward to explain that while he was left-of-center, he taught about Separation of Powers, limitations on the Executive, and reverence for the U.S. Constitution?

Or was he so good that he produced 100% sycophancy?

I wonder how this judge ever made it through grade school, much less college and law school!

h/t  Maddened Fowl

Advertisements

About guffaw1952

I'm a child of the 50's. libertarian, now medically-retired. I've been a certified firearms trainer, a private investigator, and worked for a major credit card company for almost 22 years. I am a proud NRA Life Member. I am a limited-government, free-market capitalist, who believes in the U.S. Constitution and the Rule of Law.

Discussion

4 thoughts on “Say WHAT?

  1. “The President of The United States, who was previously titled as a ‘Constitutional Law Professor'”

    Actually, he wasn’t a professor, he was a lecturer. He taught without the responsibility that comes with a professorship.

    I’m still reading the decision, but I haven’t seen where we aren’t guaranteed the right to bear arm. The SCOTUS said we did and that is the law. They didn’t specify how, such as open or concealed. I believe they left that up to the individual states. Then in McDonald, they incorporated the 2nd A to all of the states. That was why Illinois rushed a carry bill through. And their gun hating Governor signed it.

    Posted by robertsgunshop | March 4, 2015, 12:27 pm
    • Thanks for the clarification. I still wonder WHAT he taught.
      I’ve not had time to read the entire decision, either.
      If you find anything, positive or negative, with regard to what has been reported, please
      let us know.

      Posted by guffaw1952 | March 4, 2015, 5:36 pm
      • They were suing under the grounds that they weren’t being treated equally under the 14th Amendment. I think the judge was actually right because she stated that the 14th doesn’t apply to objects. Of course she also got into the police exemption and how it doesn’t apply because as we all know, the police are “special”. Which I believe is horseshit. A shiny badge and a costume shouldn’t give them rights that I am denied. California’s ban on 50BMG’s is a prime example. If the cops can have them, I should be able too.

        A few years back, a National Guard unit made a order through Sig for 90 P250’s in 40 and 45 that commemorated their tour in Afghanistan. I did the transfers at a reduced rate. I have a friend that is a Lt Col. in the unit. I shipped 3 of the guns to California. To do that, I had to fill out a bunch of online forms and be certified by the state to be able to ship to another dealer. Just more bullshit hoops to jump through to exercise a right that “Shall not be infringed”.

        I have a gun law book that the ATF sent me. It has all 50 states and California covers 60 some odd pages. Iowa covers half a page. That is just too much gun law to try and keep track of. The only gun law they really need is very simple, use a gun in a crime, go to jail for a long time. Of course the liberal idiot pisswits would scream bloody murder and tell us how “unfair” it is to lock up a criminal.

        Posted by robertsgunshop | March 5, 2015, 12:38 pm
      • Yeah, they can’t get us with constitutional legislation, so they confound us with uberbureaucracy!

        Posted by guffaw1952 | March 6, 2015, 8:11 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

"Round up the usual suspects."

In Loving Memory…

%d bloggers like this: