MRCTV host Brittany Hughes slammed Hochul’s point, responding, "And the only politicians at that time were men. Your point?"
"If Kathy Hochul's security detail doesn't set an example by switching to only using muskets first... then she can f--- right off," Washington Times columnist Tim Young tweeted.
Former Trump senior adviser Stephen Miller asked, "Will the criminals rampaging freely across New York be going back to muskets as well?" He then posed another question to Hochul’s point, "Also, out of curiosity, what medium is Hochul using to broadcast this message and did it exist in the 18th century?"
From part of Thomas's decision:
Thomas wrote, “the constitutional right to bear arms in public for self-defense is not ‘a second-class right, subject to an entirely different body of rules than the other Bill of Rights guarantees.’ McDonald, 561 U. S., at 780 (plurality opinion). The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government officers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self-defense is no different. New York’s proper-cause requirement violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their right to keep and bear arms in public.”
...
Anticipating the reactions of the three justices who reflexively and predictably dissented (Will these people ever surprise us? Or is that just left to the conservative majority members?), Thomas’s historical recitation noted the ways that gun laws were misused, writing that even in the Dred Scott decision, “Chief Justice Taney … recognized (albeit unenthusiastically in the case of blacks) that public carry was a component of the right to keep and bear arms—a right free blacks were often denied in antebellum America.”
In other words, denying gun rights or creating a test that’s too onerous is racist.
That part's got to be making the leftists scream.
I'd suggest reading some of Alito's response to the three Justices having vapors over the decision.
And this bullshit from, among others the Do'J':
The DOJ also issued a concerning statement, again not saying that they would uphold the decision but saying they “disagree.”
Read USDOJ's statement on #Bruen and then ponder the fact that in the Senate gun bill the DOJ will fund the grants enabling the development and enforcement of "red flag" laws in state capitols. They are not interested in protecting your constitutional rights. pic.twitter.com/oKFOVZQt5x
— Jennifer Van Laar (@jenvanlaar) June 23, 2022
It isn’t up to the DOJ to disagree — it’s supposed to be an objective, non-political entity enforcing the law. They’re not supposed to be making political comment. Why are they commenting at all on this? And are they saying they won’t enforce the law or act in accordance with the decision?
Some point, the Do'J' is going to pay some real price for bullshit like this. Hope I'm alive to see it.
And this bullshit from, among others the Do'J':
The DOJ also issued a concerning statement, again not saying that they would uphold the decision but saying they “disagree.”
Read USDOJ's statement on #Bruen and then ponder the fact that in the Senate gun bill the DOJ will fund the grants enabling the development and enforcement of "red flag" laws in state capitols. They are not interested in protecting your constitutional rights. pic.twitter.com/oKFOVZQt5x
— Jennifer Van Laar (@jenvanlaar) June 23, 2022
It isn’t up to the DOJ to disagree — it’s supposed to be an objective, non-political entity enforcing the law. They’re not supposed to be making political comment. Why are they commenting at all on this? And are they saying they won’t enforce the law or act in accordance with the decision?
Some point, the Do'J' is going to pay some real price for bullshit like this. Hope I'm alive to see it.
3 comments:
And today, ding dong Roe is dead.
In Jr. High School, I learned that the legislative branch made laws, the courts told if they were constitutional, and the executive branch, among other things, enforced the laws. Period, exclamation point. The problem comes when one branch tries to usurp the role of another branch, which we have seen all too often, with the Democrats.
The are inept at passing legislation, and so, instead, they either change the rules, ala Harry Reid and his killing the filibuster in the Senate for confirming justices. And of course, the Democrats became well known for also using the SCOTUS to force into law the things that they could not get passed a more centrist legislative branch. This was used to continue to enlarge gay rights, until you have gotten to what we have now, where certain groups have more rights than others, totally against what the founders and the constitution intended.
Growing up, having been born in 1960, I watched as the gay rights group made their inroads. Now, I personally have no problem with gay or lesbian people having the exact same rights that heterosexual people have. Equal treatment under the law for all, and that you know. But what has happened is that now, we have extra rights for lgbtq people. Try and call some gay person a fag or queer to their face, and you will find out that hate speech is indeed a thing, and as such, you will face some serious charges, or at the very least, you stand to lose your job and possibly your place of residence, depending upon circumstances. Of course, they can call you anything they like, from homophobic to queer hater, to much worse, and that is just fine.
As I said, I have no problem with everyone being equal. But much like I remember from the book Animal Farm, I don't like the idea that some people are More Equal. Because it involves public policy, and that means money, and it means that money that should have gone to fix my roads, or my failing bridges goes instead to places where the roads or bridges might not be as bad, but they have a large gay population, and thus need more money, because historically they didn't get enough money and so now they need indirect reparations.
It's a hell of a country right now.
Hi Bubba!!!!,
I really like this post!! 'Gona' save it, and tell my friends!!! There is so much good stuff here!!
I can just see, although he has gone on... Mike Vanderboegh, smiling!!!!
skybill
Post a Comment