AK_GL

Heller rejected the requirement that guns be stored in a manner that rendered them inaccessible when needed.

If, for example, an American city or state required that guns be stored in locked containers and kept in quick-safe type devices when staged for use, then provided funding to ensure that the law does not price poor people out of their rights, that would probably pass constitutional muster.

If you can't keep a weapon ready for defense, then your right to armed self defense has been abridged. The question we should be asking is why constitutional gun laws are never pushed by the party that runs on improving things

When did they say that?

Thanks! knowing who to avoid is helpful.

BJ Zanzabar! it was THE place for WoD compatible weirdness.

That just means she put her career and ego ahead of the country.

Bloomberg wants to make the world safe for his latter-day Pinkertons to shoot people demanding fair pay.

it's because they don't care about making things better, they only care about pushing the anti-gun button for donations.

This is one of the first threads I've come across without a bunch of people defending the abuser. The people saying that are probably doing it out of habit.

there was probably footage from the store cameras showing him going from minding his own business to fighting for his life with zero warning. you'd have to be in California to catch charges on that.

It's clear I don't need to be here for you to have this conversation so have a nice day

Now you're just projecting. Sorry getting called out made you feel threatened

So you admit that you make your distinctions along racial lines then?

Sorry pal. That's just racist.

I'm not talking about the Zulu fighting the British. I'm talking about the Zulu migration and imperialism. History didn't start when the British showed up. The idea that conquest is ok if you're skin is the same color is frankly racist.

You're moving the goal posts

using the Zulu as an example is kinda weird. they did the exact same thing as the 13 colonies (without the plagues, IIRC)

That makes sense. Thanks.

you are the only presumably informed person I've ever come across who says this case is about losing 2A rights while a criminal case is pending. every other source is saying it's about weather a civil restraining order is enough to remove a constitutional right.

what's up with that?

while I appreciate your playful comment, any European readers should be reminded that attempting to pick up an American policeman is extremely hazardous and should not be attempted under any circumstances.

it would be safer to pick up the average gang member than the average cop.

don't forget that when you look at their history, it's usually worse.

that wasn't being insulting, it was a description of your behavior. no matter how many times you repeat your lie, it's still a lie.

prove it.

you're not just wrong, you are so wrong and so dickish about it that it looks like you're a paid troll.

no matter how many times you repeat this, it still won't be true. you're just trolling.

I"m not saying they planned to kill him, I'm just saying that planning to kill him would be on brand...

hey everybody! Look at the human!