https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-governor-signs-second-amendment-freedom-act-protecting-state-from-federal-gun-laws
Arizona Governor signs Second Amendment Freedom Act, protecting state from federal gun laws
Arizona's Governor signed a new bill that will block any federal restrictions against the second amendment in the state.
This bill comes just a day before President Joe Biden is set to address the nation on gun control measures
How does this work? Since when can states outrank the federal government? Is this even constitutional?
Oh, and of course: the Arizona Governor is Republican. So much for the party of "law and order".
12 Apr 21
@vivify saidIt's just theatrics, like most politics.
https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-governor-signs-second-amendment-freedom-act-protecting-state-from-federal-gun-laws
Arizona Governor signs Second Amendment Freedom Act, protecting state from federal gun laws
How does this work? Since when can states outrank the federal government? Is this even constitutional?
Oh, and of course: the Arizona Governor is Republican. So much for the party of "law and order".
@vivify saidIf he is in fact, standing up to unconstitutional laws, then *yes*, he is a "law and order" republican
https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-governor-signs-second-amendment-freedom-act-protecting-state-from-federal-gun-laws
[quote]Arizona Governor signs Second Amendment Freedom Act, protecting state from federal gun laws
Arizona's Governor signed a new bill that will block any federal restrictions against the second amendment in the state.
This bill comes ju ...[text shortened]...
Oh, and of course: the Arizona Governor is Republican. So much for the party of "law and order".
and quite obviously, Joe Biden and his federal democrats are outside of the scope of the constitution.
yup.
I wish them luck. they'll need it.
13 Apr 21
@vivify saidif I were a gambling man, I would bet that DC won't do anything. Because i am a pessimist.
https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/arizona-governor-signs-second-amendment-freedom-act-protecting-state-from-federal-gun-laws
[quote]Arizona Governor signs Second Amendment Freedom Act, protecting state from federal gun laws
Arizona's Governor signed a new bill that will block any federal restrictions against the second amendment in the state.
This bill comes ju ...[text shortened]...
Oh, and of course: the Arizona Governor is Republican. So much for the party of "law and order".
What they can do is withhold federal funds as long as Arizona is not compliant with federal law.
Maybe they can build a wall around it.
And, of course, neighboring states can make their own laws.
13 Apr 21
@earl-of-trumps said“ he is a "law and order" republican”
If he is in fact, standing up to unconstitutional laws, then *yes*, he is a "law and order" republican
and quite obviously, Joe Biden and his federal democrats are outside of the scope of the constitution.
yup.
I wish them luck. they'll need it.
Hahaha by that you mean he’s a stooge of the NRA who is quite happy to see school children blown away in the name of its profits and kickbacks.
13 Apr 21
@kevcvs57 saidYou do have a way with words, Kev!
“ he is a "law and order" republican”
Hahaha by that you mean he’s a stooge of the NRA who is quite happy to see school children blown away in the name of its profits and kickbacks.
Yes, there are truly horrific incidents where many innocents lose their lives to a wrongful, murdering individual.
But let's for a moment look at the alternative. Just look at what is happening in Myanmar as an example.
The people don't have guns and protesters can be blown away by a government gun. But the big difference is
the government can kill *millions*, as they have before, and surely will again.
Also, too, Kev,,,
When I hear control freaks (liberals) urging me to give up my protection and means to have an uprising,
I *know* they are not doing this for my better protection, Kev, or of protection of society. The libs are doing
right now what Hitler did 85 years ago... taking the guns away from the people to make the streets in Germany safe
Rinse and repeat.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147480
13 Apr 21
@earl-of-trumps saidyet they are too ignorant to see this.
You do have a way with words, Kev!
Yes, there are truly horrific incidents where many innocents lose their lives to a wrongful, murdering individual.
But let's for a moment look at the alternative. Just look at what is happening in Myanmar as an example.
The people don't have guns and protesters can be blown away by a government gun. But the big difference is
th ...[text shortened]... go... taking the guns away from the people to make the streets in Germany safe
Rinse and repeat.
@earl-of-trumps saidMerely putting restrictions on gun ownership doesn't violate the Constitution, as evidenced by the many restrictions already existing.
If he is in fact, standing up to unconstitutional laws, then *yes*, he is a "law and order" republican
and quite obviously, Joe Biden and his federal democrats are outside of the scope of the constitution.
yup.
I wish them luck. they'll need it.
This isn't about the Constitution. Republicans don't care about "law and order" like they claim.
13 Apr 21
@earl-of-trumps said,The Constitution does NOT give personal protection as a reason for gun ownership; the point was to maintain a well-regulated militia. The largest and most powerful military in the world both no longer needs a militia and doesn't even have one.
When I hear control freaks (liberals) urging me to give up my protection and means to have an uprising,
I *know* they are not doing this for my better protection, Kev, or of protection of society.
That part is key: despite all the guns in this country, the U.S. doesn't have a "well-regulated" militia that can be reliably used as a defense in case of an attack. Therefore, there is no reason for private gun ownership. The need gun ownership mentioned in the Constitution *no longer exists*.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147480
@vivify saidthe SCOTUS disagrees with your stance
The Constitution does NOT give personal protection as a reason for gun ownership; the point was to maintain a well-regulated militia. The largest and most powerful military in the world both no longer needs a militia and doesn't even have one.
That part is key: despite all the guns in this country, the U.S. doesn't have a "well-regulated" militia that can be reliably use ...[text shortened]... for private gun ownership. The need gun ownership mentioned in the Constitution *no longer exists*.
13 Apr 21
@Earl-of-Trumps
Tell me, if a madman comes into a mall with an AK47 and a 200 round magazine.
Compare that to the same madman with a 6 shot pistol.
Tell me, in which scenario would result in the most deaths?
Tell me what ANY civilian needs with a military grade weapon?
You need a 100 round mag to kill a deer?
No, but a madman in a mall bent on killing humans sure will use it.
BECAUSE and AK47 or AR15 is a killing machine.
So tell me again how restricting access to those deadly weapons is unconstitutional?
So if it is unconstitutional to stop that kind of sale why can we not allow anyone to make an Abomb in their basement?
Or maybe using a 3D printer to MAKE an AK47, and THEN go out on a killing spree.
What OTHER use could anyone have for such deadly weapons?
Serious question.
@mott-the-hoople saidI truly don't think the Big Thinkers are ignorant of the facts.
yet they are too ignorant to see this.
What I think is the case is, the Big Thinkers WANT to slaughter the sheeple. It's a long story.
Cripes all mighty, they've been pushing for a race war now for a long time, not to mention the war on the rich.
A socialists favorite saying... "I KEEL you"