“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Fighter jets, ballistic missiles, bullet proof vests e.t.c. should all constitute as legal under the 2nd amendment. How else are you supposed to combat tyranny?
[ - ] PygmyGoat 1 point 9 monthsAug 25, 2024 02:02:48 ago (+1/-0)
Biden said, “If you wanted or if you think you need to have weapons to take on the government, you need F-15s and maybe some nuclear weapons. The point is that there has always been the ability to limit — rationally limit the type of weapon that can be owned and who can own it.” Well I think this just got blown out of the sky.
Yes, we shouldn't be restricted in arms. But, anyone who says that fighter jets and ballistic missiles are required to defeat tyrants is either a fool or liar.
Look no further than the Iraq and Afghan wars. 100K+ troops with a $500M+ budget against ~10K fighters with Kalashnikovs and home made bombs.
The minimum that's required to defeat tyrants is small arms and an understanding that you've got nothing to lose. They want to take the small arms before we collectively realize we have nothing else to lose.
Yeah, but you’re talking about our government waging war, where the intent was never to win, it was to keep the war going for as long as possible to drive up national debt and fill jewish contractor pockets with as much money as possible. If we didn’t follow the Geneva convention rules of engagement, and decided we just want to defeat an enemy, our military could’ve wiped out that nation and its people in their entirety, and they could’ve done so in less than two years, the cave stragglers would’ve been the hard part, but they wouldn’t have been that difficult to kill off if that was our intent, rather than capturing the enemy and only firing on them if they fired on us first.
Can tyranny be defeated with small arms? Yeah, but that depends on a couple things:
-how small is the tyrannical government’s military? Because if that regime has our military with all of its equipment, only having small arms probably isn’t going to be enough to defeat the regime.
-is that tyrannical regime willing to wipe out their own infrastructure, and mass murder their own citizens just to kill the enemy? If the answer is yes, there wont be many places to hide while they’re hunting their opposition down.
The U.S. ZOG has a massive military, and plenty of equipment they can use to mass murder dissidents while not even placing their own lives in danger. I don’t think the U.S. ZOG would be willing to destroy all of the infrastructure in the U.S. though, suburban and rural areas they’d bomb the shit out of before sending in soldiers to defeat the remainder, and those soldiers would have tanks, AC-130’s, drones and attack helicopters to mitigate the remaining revolutionaries. As for the major city centers, they’d want to preserve them, so that would be one of their only weaknesses if they waged an all out war on American revolutionaries. Their victory would ultimately rely on having a compliant military though, because if dissident factions built up inside of their military who were not happy about mass murdering their own countrymen, it’s a guarantee that some of their military equipment and soldiers would be used against their ZOG master, which could lead to the destruction of ZOG as a whole.
There is a historical NC law that passes the new guidelines that bans "dangerous and unusual" weapons. The fact that full-auto is legally owned by thousands of citizens makes it fail the "unusual" part, but ballistic missiles are very unusual and would stay illegal. Many people own jets and kevlar vests though, (and if machine guns are legal than you could fit your jet with up to .50 caliber guns, making it a "fighter") so they will be federally legal, which vests already are anyway. Explosives would be limited to what miners and demo experts usually use, no RPGs.
Fuck judges. Those jew bastards have too much power in this country. This is one ruling in the public's favor versus thousands of rulings against the popular will. Those (almost all liberal) scumbags are responsible for everything wrong with this country. They've twisted the constitution with their anti-White, pro-jew interpretations of the law for way too long. The authority given to that branch of government is responsible for, among many other poor decisions, faggot marriage, open borders, foreign wars, diversity, inclusion, equity, affirmative action, the welfare state, "transexual" children's rights, forced integration and school bussing. 25 years ago in California, 90% of the people voted against tax benefits being provided to illegal immigrants. One jew judge overturned the will of millions of people and changed that state forever. Fuck them.
Once you realize that you live under Uniform Commercial Code and not Constitutional Law, it will all make sense. If you declare yourself a United States citizen, then you are property belonging to the federal government and they can do what they wish with you. You fall under civil rights law, granted by the federal government, and they can dictate how you use them or remove them from you. Civil rights are not the same as Constitutional rights, which are recognized as bestowed by the Creator and are inalienable. Civil rights were created for former slaves after the Civil War.
The thing is, yeah you can have a machinegun, they're just prohibitively expensive and you have go jump through the NFA hoops and shit. Nothings changed.
Next step... Nullify, and nuke "the NFA hops and shit" now that we have a Federal Legal Precedent established. End the entire intentional burden of the stamp system completely.
I would love to watch all the boomers with Title III collections kvetch. You know it'll be a shitstorm when their $100,000 M60s drop to $6k over night.
I've met some of those old fucks who outright told me they would be against nullifying thw NFA because of their precious investments. Selfish old cocksuckers
They're the same with houses. Won't hand it down to kids, they'll sell it. The kids could make some improvements, sell it after 5 years, and make even more money.
Yes, but the gun in question was an Anderson Arms AF-15 chambered in .300 blackout. That wasn't around in 1986. No stamp, no NFA paperwork, just a semi-auto converted to full-auto that she can now fully legally own and operate. The trial was in Kansas, but it was a US judge in Federal Court, if they appeal it up the line and the Supreme declines to take the case, it will become standing federal law, unofficially. I am sure that the first few dozen people who publically take advantage of the new loophole will be challenged in court as well, but until the Supreme Court says the final word, it will be a mix of people being proven to legally own full-autos and people spending a lot of time in federal prison, depending on how the judge they get decides to interpret the Bruen decision, or if the prosecution is able to definitively find an analogous historical law.
No it's just saying of course u can get machine guns. Just jump through the NFA hoops, be an old ass gun (pre-1986) and get ur stamp. Nothings changed. 2 more weeks.
It is saying that she doesn't, she took a semi-auto AF-15 in .300 and converted to full-auto, which now is fully legal for her to own, until it gets appealed, anyway. A recent Supreme Court case (Bruen) says that prosecutors have to justify a modern gun law with a historical gun law that is very similair, or else the modern law gets trumped by the 2nd Amendment. They couldn't do that in this case, but it sounds like they didn't try very hard.
Well, so the consideration then reverts to the exact consideration first posted. If I purchase a semi-automatic weapon and intend to convert it to include selective fire functionality, under today's regulatory environment, I must then report it to ATF and request a tax stamp. I know about Bruen but it's not clear what specific regulations this would repeal if upheld. If this is directed squarely at the National Firearms Act, that would be huge but I'm not sure we've seen exactly how the ruling would be applied moving forward.
[ - ] breh2 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 16:48:54 ago (+1/-0)
It is currently illegal to modify a semi-auto to increase it's rate of fire, only guns manufactured before 1986 that already possessed the capability to fire full-auto qualify for a tax stamp. This case rules that the NFAs rules against post-1986 made guns are unconstitutional, thus legalizing-by-precedent the ability for anyone to buy or modify a full-auto weapon, possibly without requiring permission via tax stamp from the government. It may still be applied that you must request a stamp with a $200 fee, but only if the ATF loses the ability to deny any application, and changes from a may-issue to a must-issue, and removing the grandfather clause, so any weapon made anytime will be legal to own after registering. The main issue in this case was her ownership of a post-1986 manufactured weapon, they didn't charge her with failing to request a tax stamp, because before this case, it was impossible for her to do so. This case only says that the right of a person to own a modern machinegun is protected by the 2nd, nothing about local or national registration requirements.
The thing to note here is, even though this happened in kansas, this was a ruling by a federal judge, in a federal court and this will have implications across the country. Edit to add this quote “Machine guns fall under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment, U.S. District Judge John Broomes found.”
It's even better that most realize because Citizens, who can legally own firearms, can both open and conceal carry WITHOUT a permit.
Concealed Carry in Kansas Without Permit Requirements
Kansas is a permitless carry state, meaning that adults 21 years of age and older do not need a permit to carry a concealed handgun. This applies to both residents and non-residents.
Key Points:
No permit required for concealed carry for individuals 21 years and older
Individuals 18-20 years old can carry a concealed handgun with proper training and a provisional concealed-carry license
Reciprocity recognized for valid licenses issued by jurisdictions recognized by Kansas, such as other state governments
Open carry of handguns is prohibited in state buildings marked with approved Kansas Attorney General signage
Carry Locations:
Carry in vehicle: Yes, without a license
Carry in bars/restaurants that serve alcohol: Yes, unless posted and not under the influence of alcohol or drugs
Store in a vehicle in an employee parking lot: No employer restrictions
Other Notes:
Kansas does not require background checks for private sales
Background checks are required for purchases from Federal Firearms Dealers, except for Kansas concealed carry handgun license holders
Kansas concealed carry handgun license holders are exempt from background checks when purchasing handguns
If you are a convicted felon, then you can NOT legally own, possess, or carry a firearm. That's about it.
There are a few legal routes for convicted felons to have their felony records expunged and have their firearms rights restored, but it's lengthy and expensive.
I know all this, I was being facetious. The law only applies to those who follow it. Anyone can do anything they want and they can do it forever, as log at they aren’t caught.
Where is it written in the constitution that a may due to be drafted fails to pay alimony so gets jailed, no longer has the right to bare arms upon release?
That part about getting convicted within the due process of law. 5th Amendment.
A convicted felon does not enjoy a right to liberty after his conviction, which is the basis of the state being authorized to jail the felon. Losing the right too bear arms or vote is no different.
Felonies are determined by the State's Legislature and signed by the Governor.
Gun laws are stupid, even when applied to felons, but for felons, they aren't unconstitutional.
No. It seems reasonable that once you do your time, you get all your rights back. Fuck parole and probation. Fuck laws that pubish people for victimless crime. Fuck early release for actual crimes committed.
If you can't trust a felon to have a gun, maybe he shouldn't be allowed on the streets.
The court would block a no air law. But if your state could pass a law making it a felony to breathe and the governor signed it into law, you got bigger troubles than felons in possession of weapons.
[ + ] oyveyo
[ - ] oyveyo 12 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:35:03 ago (+12/-0)
We're moving back to Kansas.
[ + ] yesiknow
[ - ] yesiknow 9 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 00:49:39 ago (+9/-0)
[ + ] recon_johnny
[ - ] recon_johnny 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 12:03:21 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Prairie
[ - ] Prairie 8 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 00:58:59 ago (+8/-0)
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 6 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 04:41:31 ago (+6/-0)
[ + ] BulletStopper
[ - ] BulletStopper 8 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:40:04 ago (+8/-0)
[ + ] GetFuckedCunt
[ - ] GetFuckedCunt 6 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 02:20:06 ago (+6/-0)
Fighter jets, ballistic missiles, bullet proof vests e.t.c. should all constitute as legal under the 2nd amendment. How else are you supposed to combat tyranny?
[ + ] Crackinjokes
[ - ] Crackinjokes 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 06:38:49 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 10:31:34 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PygmyGoat
[ - ] PygmyGoat 1 point 9 monthsAug 25, 2024 02:02:48 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 9 monthsAug 25, 2024 08:18:52 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] stillmostlyfriendly
[ - ] stillmostlyfriendly 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 09:57:04 ago (+1/-0)
Look no further than the Iraq and Afghan wars. 100K+ troops with a $500M+ budget against ~10K fighters with Kalashnikovs and home made bombs.
The minimum that's required to defeat tyrants is small arms and an understanding that you've got nothing to lose. They want to take the small arms before we collectively realize we have nothing else to lose.
[ + ] Warden
[ - ] Warden 2 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 17:24:17 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 17:23:13 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Warden
[ - ] Warden 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 17:46:49 ago (+0/-0)*
-how small is the tyrannical government’s military? Because if that regime has our military with all of its equipment, only having small arms probably isn’t going to be enough to defeat the regime.
-is that tyrannical regime willing to wipe out their own infrastructure, and mass murder their own citizens just to kill the enemy? If the answer is yes, there wont be many places to hide while they’re hunting their opposition down.
The U.S. ZOG has a massive military, and plenty of equipment they can use to mass murder dissidents while not even placing their own lives in danger. I don’t think the U.S. ZOG would be willing to destroy all of the infrastructure in the U.S. though, suburban and rural areas they’d bomb the shit out of before sending in soldiers to defeat the remainder, and those soldiers would have tanks, AC-130’s, drones and attack helicopters to mitigate the remaining revolutionaries. As for the major city centers, they’d want to preserve them, so that would be one of their only weaknesses if they waged an all out war on American revolutionaries. Their victory would ultimately rely on having a compliant military though, because if dissident factions built up inside of their military who were not happy about mass murdering their own countrymen, it’s a guarantee that some of their military equipment and soldiers would be used against their ZOG master, which could lead to the destruction of ZOG as a whole.
[ + ] breh2
[ - ] breh2 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 18:30:36 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Puller_of_Noses
[ - ] Puller_of_Noses 4 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 07:47:56 ago (+4/-0)
This is one ruling in the public's favor versus thousands of rulings against the popular will.
Those (almost all liberal) scumbags are responsible for everything wrong with this country.
They've twisted the constitution with their anti-White, pro-jew interpretations of the law for way too long.
The authority given to that branch of government is responsible for, among many other poor decisions, faggot marriage, open borders, foreign wars, diversity, inclusion, equity, affirmative action, the welfare state, "transexual" children's rights, forced integration and school bussing.
25 years ago in California, 90% of the people voted against tax benefits being provided to illegal immigrants. One jew judge overturned the will of millions of people and changed that state forever. Fuck them.
[ + ] TheNoticing
[ - ] TheNoticing 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 13:23:20 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PygmyGoat
[ - ] PygmyGoat 0 points 9 monthsAug 25, 2024 02:09:24 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Not_a_redfugee
[ - ] Not_a_redfugee 4 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 03:11:13 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] KosherHiveKicker
[ - ] KosherHiveKicker [op] 6 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 05:52:19 ago (+6/-0)
That is how it's done legally.
[ + ] MuricaPersonified
[ - ] MuricaPersonified 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 06:37:14 ago (+2/-1)
I've met some of those old fucks who outright told me they would be against nullifying thw NFA because of their precious investments. Selfish old cocksuckers
[ + ] TheNoticing
[ - ] TheNoticing 2 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 13:22:05 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Loonyskiprooney
[ - ] Loonyskiprooney 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 07:42:05 ago (+2/-2)
[ + ] Salacious_Salicylic
[ - ] Salacious_Salicylic 3 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 08:44:22 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] MuricaPersonified
[ - ] MuricaPersonified 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 11:57:05 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 10:30:40 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] breh2
[ - ] breh2 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 13:49:58 ago (+0/-0)
I am sure that the first few dozen people who publically take advantage of the new loophole will be challenged in court as well, but until the Supreme Court says the final word, it will be a mix of people being proven to legally own full-autos and people spending a lot of time in federal prison, depending on how the judge they get decides to interpret the Bruen decision, or if the prosecution is able to definitively find an analogous historical law.
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 3 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 09:44:03 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] NoRefunds
[ - ] NoRefunds 3 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 06:19:42 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] ReturnOfTheGoats
[ - ] ReturnOfTheGoats 3 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 00:34:40 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Nosferatjew
[ - ] Nosferatjew 3 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 01:36:01 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] Indoctrinated_USA
[ - ] Indoctrinated_USA 2 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 02:48:57 ago (+2/-0)
They just need an NFA stamp.
Is this saying we don't?
[ + ] KosherHiveKicker
[ - ] KosherHiveKicker [op] 5 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 05:53:08 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] Not_a_redfugee
[ - ] Not_a_redfugee 3 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 03:13:41 ago (+4/-1)
[ + ] breh2
[ - ] breh2 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 13:58:17 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Indoctrinated_USA
[ - ] Indoctrinated_USA 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 15:20:33 ago (+0/-0)
If I purchase a semi-automatic weapon and intend to convert it to include selective fire functionality, under today's regulatory environment, I must then report it to ATF and request a tax stamp.
I know about Bruen but it's not clear what specific regulations this would repeal if upheld.
If this is directed squarely at the National Firearms Act, that would be huge but I'm not sure we've seen exactly how the ruling would be applied moving forward.
[ + ] breh2
[ - ] breh2 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 16:48:54 ago (+1/-0)
It may still be applied that you must request a stamp with a $200 fee, but only if the ATF loses the ability to deny any application, and changes from a may-issue to a must-issue, and removing the grandfather clause, so any weapon made anytime will be legal to own after registering. The main issue in this case was her ownership of a post-1986 manufactured weapon, they didn't charge her with failing to request a tax stamp, because before this case, it was impossible for her to do so. This case only says that the right of a person to own a modern machinegun is protected by the 2nd, nothing about local or national registration requirements.
[ + ] Fascinus
[ - ] Fascinus 2 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 22:49:28 ago (+2/-0)
First spearhunting, now fully automatic weapons?
Kansas is looking better all the time!
[ + ] JudyStroyer
[ - ] JudyStroyer 7 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:58:02 ago (+7/-0)
Edit to add this quote “Machine guns fall under the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment, U.S. District Judge John Broomes found.”
[ + ] KosherHiveKicker
[ - ] KosherHiveKicker [op] 2 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:00:51 ago (+2/-0)*
Kansas is a permitless carry state, meaning that adults 21 years of age and older do not need a permit to carry a concealed handgun. This applies to both residents and non-residents.
Key Points:
No permit required for concealed carry for individuals 21 years and older
Individuals 18-20 years old can carry a concealed handgun with proper training and a provisional concealed-carry license
Reciprocity recognized for valid licenses issued by jurisdictions recognized by Kansas, such as other state governments
Open carry of handguns is prohibited in state buildings marked with approved Kansas Attorney General signage
Carry Locations:
Carry in vehicle: Yes, without a license
Carry in bars/restaurants that serve alcohol: Yes, unless posted and not under the influence of alcohol or drugs
Store in a vehicle in an employee parking lot: No employer restrictions
Other Notes:
Kansas does not require background checks for private sales
Background checks are required for purchases from Federal Firearms Dealers, except for Kansas concealed carry handgun license holders
Kansas concealed carry handgun license holders are exempt from background checks when purchasing handguns
[ + ] TheOriginal1Icemonkey
[ - ] TheOriginal1Icemonkey 6 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:18:01 ago (+6/-0)
Who the fuck decided what ‘legally’ is?
[ + ] KosherHiveKicker
[ - ] KosherHiveKicker [op] 3 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:22:01 ago (+3/-0)
There are a few legal routes for convicted felons to have their felony records expunged and have their firearms rights restored, but it's lengthy and expensive.
[ + ] TheOriginal1Icemonkey
[ - ] TheOriginal1Icemonkey 5 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:27:22 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] Belfuro
[ - ] Belfuro 2 points 9 monthsAug 23, 2024 23:58:28 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 10:29:30 ago (+0/-0)
A convicted felon does not enjoy a right to liberty after his conviction, which is the basis of the state being authorized to jail the felon. Losing the right too bear arms or vote is no different.
Felonies are determined by the State's Legislature and signed by the Governor.
Gun laws are stupid, even when applied to felons, but for felons, they aren't unconstitutional.
[ + ] TheNoticing
[ - ] TheNoticing 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 13:26:20 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 19:42:45 ago (+0/-0)
If you can't trust a felon to have a gun, maybe he shouldn't be allowed on the streets.
[ + ] Belfuro
[ - ] Belfuro 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 20:19:25 ago (+0/-0)
Make everyone a felon for crime of exhaling co2.
Sorted, no gun rights for anyone.
[ + ] FreeinTX
[ - ] FreeinTX 0 points 9 monthsAug 25, 2024 08:20:56 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Indoctrinated_USA
[ - ] Indoctrinated_USA 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 15:21:59 ago (+0/-0)
Then it looks like Kansas.
[ + ] Fascinus
[ - ] Fascinus 2 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 15:34:08 ago (+2/-0)
Also tornadoes. Hard pass.
[ + ] TheNoticing
[ - ] TheNoticing 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 13:18:01 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] rabidR04CH
[ - ] rabidR04CH 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 06:09:06 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] Clubberlang
[ - ] Clubberlang 1 point 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 09:51:24 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] breh2
[ - ] breh2 0 points 9 monthsAug 24, 2024 14:35:00 ago (+0/-0)