The Supreme Showdown: Bruen Has The Makings of a Major Second Amendment Victory

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will take up arguably the oldest and most controversial right in our history. New York State Rifle Association v. Bruen is the first major gun rights case in over ten years to come before the Supreme Court and it has the makings of a major gun rights victory in the making.

The case concerns concealed-carry restrictions under N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(2)(f) that require a showing of “proper cause.” Lower courts have upheld the New York law, but there are ample constitutional concerns over its vague standard, such as showing that you are “of good moral character.” New York wants to exercise discretion in deciding who needs to carry guns in public while gun owners believe that the law flips the constitutional presumption in favor of such a right.

There are few constitutional rights that have been debated so long in this country as gun rights. Indeed, before other Englishmen were given a written guarantee of the right to bear arms, colonists in Virginia in 1607 were given such a written guarantee by the Crown.  Since that time, the right to bear arms has been an engrained part of our culture and ultimately our Constitution.

Despite that history, the meaning of the right has remained the subject of heated debate. That is evident from the fact that it was not until 2008 that the Supreme Court finally recognized the right to bear arms as an individual right in District of Columbia v. Heller. Two years after Heller, in McDonald v. City of Chicago, the court ruled that this right applied against the states.

This is actually the second time in two years that the New York State Rifle Association has come knocking on the door of the Supreme Court. The Association previously challenged a New York law that imposed stringent conditions on the ability of gun owners to even transport their guns outside of their homes. The law was viewed by some of us as unconstitutional under existing case law, but New York politicians insisted that it would be defended all the way up to the Supreme Court.  However, when the Court called their bluff and accepted the case, those politicians quickly changed the law and pulled the case before the Court could rule.

The bait-and-switch incensed members of the Court who delayed in the dismissal of the case.  Justices Samuel AlitoNeil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas specifically called out New York for “manipulating” the docket by withdrawing an unconstitutional law just before a final opinion. Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined in the condemnation and added menacingly that “some federal and state courts may not be properly applying Heller and McDonald. The Court should address that issue soon, perhaps in one of the several Second Amendment cases with petitions for certiorari now pending before the Court.”

They ultimately did precisely that and took another case by the very same plaintiffs: the New York State Rifle Association.

The current court membership is arguably the strongest Second Amendment bench in decades. That includes Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who wrote a strong defense of the Second Amendment defense as an appellate judge.  While it is always dangerous to predict outcomes before the Court, this case was accepted with a likely intent to reverse the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (which also upheld the earlier restrictive law).

With lower courts chipping away at its prior precedent, the Court seems poised to push back with a case that brings greater clarity and support for the right to bear guns in public. Many Second Amendment advocates are encouraging the Court to pull back on language from Heller that has been cited mantra-like by lower courts limiting the scope of this right. Many point to the court’s statement in Heller, which acknowledged that “like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” It then listed possible “sensitive places” for denying permits to former felons.

The Court is likely to continue to recognize reasonable limitations, including possibly some location-based limits. However, it may create a clear presumption in favor of law-bidding citizens to bear arms outside of the home. The natural default under the Second Amendment in favor of gun owners is likely to be strengthened.

The showdown with New York and the Second Circuit in that sense was merely delayed, but not forgotten by the Court. Ironically, the earlier law would have presented a narrower platform for reconsidering the Second Amendment. By gaming the system a year ago, New York may have delivered a far greater opportunity for Second Amendment advocates in the case.

Of course, the Court could have accepted the case to simply amplify its agreement with the Second Circuit, but I would not count on it. It is like the scene in Braveheart when William Wallace said that he was going to “pick a fight” with the British when others were looking for a compromise. That came as little surprise to his main lieutenant Hamish who shrugged and added “Well, we didn’t get dressed up for nothing.”




65 thoughts on “The Supreme Showdown: Bruen Has The Makings of a Major Second Amendment Victory”

  1. There’s plenty of new news breaking most days of the week lately like: CDC says ok to harm/kill 5-11 yr old kids- NIH study shows 86% test trial kids had severe adverse effects-25 to 56% will Die after Jabbed with 5-10 years.

    Then there’s Tucker Carlson’s Latest Report of another Fed Govt’s “False Flag” against American Citizens & Trump on January 6 2021.

    These were just a couple of the news interviews of guest from Infowars’ Alex Jones Show 11/3/2021, later this evening posted to archived at Banned.Video .

    That’s where I heard & why I’m looking back on Turley’s comments/warning from 20 years ago,( or less,) as mentioned on AJ’s show.

    Search: Jonathan Turley warned 20 years ago that the Patriot Act will be used against Americans:


    1. You are such a dope. How could a study by the National Institutes of Health show that 25 to 50% of children will die within 5-10 years when the vaccine hasn’t been around for more than 2 years? And how could the vaccine be more lethal than the disease it prevents? Tucker Carlson is a liar, even according to Fox News standards.

      1. Very interesting isn’t it!

        Experimental bug juice just shot up in those 26 Million young kids arms, as that one evil ahole says, just to see what happens. Do the Math, what will it be 13 Million kids Whacked by Big Pharma ? Or More!

        You can listen/view that comment & more just as soon as posted to the archive Banned.Video of AJ’s infowars show with attorney Robert Barnes (that’s filing suit w/RFK jr over this issue) .

        We’ll all know the scare about the Covid 19 Bio-Weapon, related Mutations & it’s mRNA death Jabs/Clots sisters is over the day Dr Fauci, Bill Gates & all other culpable Aholes are being marched into prison for their Crimes Against Humanity.

        Well, look here already both are posted:

        FDA Knew About Numerous Adverse Events For Children ‘Related’ To Pfizer Vaccine, Approved It Anyway


        Nov 3, 2021
        The Alex Jones Show
        The Alex Jones Show

        The Food And Drug Administration (FDA) approved an emergency use authorization for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for children as young as 5 years old despite the fact that its Pfizer-connected advisory committee knew about numerous adverse events that were reported in Pfizer’s clinical trials for children, including adverse events that were determined to be “related” to the clinical vaccine trial. Read more here:


        Biggest Vaccine Whistleblower in History Exposes FDA Falsified Data in COVID Jab Trials, says Robert Barnes



        Nov 3, 2021
        The Alex Jones Show
        The Alex Jones Show

        Robert Barnes ******************* to break down the biggest vaccine whistleblower news in history as the FDA is exposed falsifying data in COVID jab trials.

      2. “And how could the vaccine be more lethal than the disease it prevents?”

        Did you really say something that stupid.

        Arsenic was used successfully to treat syphilis.
        Arsenic is far more deadly than syphillis.
        It works if you are very careful.

        When Covid first appeared – bio-chemists tested every single existing drug against Covid to see if any of those had antiviral properties.

        A significant percentage of these were highly effective in the laboratory – in vitro.

        HCQ was one of those -HCQ absolutely positively kills Covid in vitro.
        There is no doubt about that at all.
        Further there are many many other existing drugs that kill covid in vitro.

        The next step is to test the ones that work in vitro, in life -in vivo.

        There is still huge debate over Ivermectin and HCQ in vivo.

        Whether the left likes it or not there is very strong evidence that each works to prevent and or mitigate Covid in vivo.
        But it is also true that neither – nor anything else is a magic bullet that completely wipes out Covid in all cases.

        Both also face a different problem – the emergency us approval of the vaccines is conditional on there being no effective treatment.

        The moment that the FDA approves off label use of any existing drug for Covid the Emergency use approval for the vaccines is automatically rescinded.

        And the last problem with Ivermectin and HCQ is that because they are incredibly cheap and there are no existing patents on them, they offer no benefit to big pharma.

        The opposition of Big Pharma to anything that is not new and therefore patent protected should be obvious from the fact that we are not vigorously pushing Vitamin D.

        First the health benefits of Vitamin D are well known. Nearly every serious disease is significantly negatively impacted by Vitamin D.

        We should be doing everything we can to get every living person on the planet to normal vitamin D levels.
        This is particularly true as you get older -as vitamin D levels drop naturally with age.

        The best way to get Vitamin D is from the sun – and we already know from Covid that those places with more sun and more people outside in the sun have lower Covid infections, hospitalizations and deaths.
        We also know that Covid negatively impacts those with darker skin – darker skin reduces natural vitamin D production -though it also reduces skin cancers.
        It is much harder to get vitamin D from foods or supliments – but it can be done, and it does work.

        Normal vitamin D levels are nearly as effective as the vaccine at protecting one from Covid.
        And giving infected people Vitamin D analogues reduces the severity of Covid, the duration and the odds of dying by more than 50%.

        So why isn’t just about every medical professional pushing Vitamin D ?

        Because Vitamin D is cheap, readily available and no one will profit from it.
        There will not be billions in research grants.

        Much of this nonsense has driven us often to the WORST public health policies.

        We closed down beaches in FL in the spring of 2020. That was incredibly stupid.
        daytime outside covid transmission – even in crowds is almost non-existant.
        Even nighttime outdoor transmission is lower than anywhere else.
        Regardless 15min outside in a sunny climate will rapidly get someone to normal vitamin D levels.

        Then we locked people down.

        We now know – though we could have guessed, that covid spread in large buildings with comercial HVAC systems is dramatically lower than it is in homes. Spending more time is older spaces smaller spaces, most homes is much more dangerous that going out into the world, than going to most jobs.

        1. John B Say,

          How more deaths, now of little kids 5-11 are these mRNA Jab pushers like Natacha willing to except before they say no, Hell No, Not One More????

          I’ve not time just now.

          I’ve got to get back & review this 1st video soon & watch this new one:

          Calamitous Suppression of Early CV-19 Treatment – Dr. Pierre Kory


          The 2nd one

          Top of the page for now.

        2. John I live in AZ. We all read about getting lots of sun and Vitamin D. In June 2020 AZ. Got hammered with Covid. The heat and Sun didn’t not help people in AZ. And June is our best Sun month. Lots of vitamin D from Sun didn’t keep us safe from Covid.

  2. Alec Baldwin was just exercising his right to bare arms. He just couldn’t bring himself to attending an NRA class on how to safely handle a firearm. He believes that guns should be legal on his movie set but should not be owned by the common citizen who has learned to respect the danger of improperly handling a firearm. If he had made it a requirement for his staff to attend an NRA class he might not have had to stand at the grave sight to watch his compatriot being slowly lowered into the ground. His tears are full of the dead ones blood that drips slowly onto his hands.

  3. The right to bear arms is only controversial to those who have either never felt the need for self defense, or are lucky enough to have a security detail.

    As soon as someone becomes worried about their own personal safety, or that of their family, then tend to change their tune on guns tout de suite. There were residents and business owners in CHOP/CHAZ who came to the distressing realization that Leftists had created an anarchy zone, and that the police were not coming. Would never come if they called 911.

    I have this far Left relative who was adamantly against the 2nd Amendment. Any case of self defense I offered was met with “call the police.” When I informed him the police cannot arrive in time if someone is already breaking in, he’d just shrug his shoulders and say to let the cops handle it. Women with violent stalkers? Shrug.

    Yet when the pandemic hit, guess who went out and bought a gun? Guess who worried about how he would protect his daughter if the police in his low crime neighborhood couldn’t arrive, due to too many cops out sick?

    He, like so many others, absolutely could not understand the need for armed self defense until he felt vulnerable.

    I was as vulnerable as it’s possible to be once, and I wasn’t armed. I’m lucky to be alive. I know first hand what real helplessness feels like. The only way to even out the odds with someone that much stronger than you is a weapon. Hollywood is lying. A woman cannot deftly block a blow from a Claymore, and she can’t beat a 6’5″ man to a bloody pulp with her bare hands. The closest thing to realism in Hollywood women fighting would be martial arts, and even then, it’s highly stylized and brought to mystical properties. Women can’t really fly through the air as in Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon…not unless they’re thrown by a stronger man.

    When you’re in immediate danger, all you have to rely upon is yourself. You might be the only thing between an intruder and your kids one day. You should be ready and prepared to deal with emergencies, whether it’s having food set by in case of storm or earthquake (or shipping containers stuff offshore), or having a well-maintained firearm you’re knowledgeable about using.

    1. Yeah, Karen, the boogie man is coming for you, so you need a gun because that’s the best protection there is–right? How many times are there home invasions in which someone saved their life by using a gun? Very few. But that’s not the point, is it? It’s stoking fear and more of the alt-right propaganda that somehow the rights of the disciples are being infringed upon by the “Left” and Democrats who want to take away some perceived “right” to tote a gun around because you feel “vulnerable”. Get a good home security system, or at least, get a dog that barks a lot. More people shoot themselves accidentally than intruders, and then there’s the kids who accidentally shoot themselves or other people.

      1. None of what you said is actually true. Home owners stop intruders al the time with firearms. It’s just never published. If you wanna rely on a home security system for protection. Have at it. The right is never perceived. It is a right.

    2. In 1993 attorney Jeffrey Snyder published an essay entitled “Nation of Cowards”
      It is a brilliant defense of the right to bear arms.
      My favorite line:
      “Crime is not only a complete disavowal of the social contract, but also a commandeering of the victim’s person and liberty. If the individual’s dignity lies in the fact that he is a moral agent engaging in actions of his own will, in free exchange with others, then crime always violates the victim’s dignity. It is, in fact, an act of enslavement. Your wallet, your purse, or your car may not be worth your life, but your dignity is; and if it is not worth fighting for, it can hardly be said to exist.”
      One more quote for our friend Natacha:
      “Many people deal with the problem of crime by convincing themselves that they live, work, and travel only in special “crime-free” zones. Invariably, they react with shock and hurt surprise when they discover that criminals do not play by the rules and do not respect these imaginary boundaries. If, however, you understand that crime can occur anywhere at anytime, and if you understand that you can be maimed or mortally wounded in mere seconds, you may wish to consider whether you are willing to place the responsibility for safeguarding your life in the hands of others.”

    3. Personally, I do not like guns. I have lost family and friends to suicide and in one case improper handling of a weapon while cleaning the firearm. Unfortunately, they are necessary in some cases.

      We purchased a firearm and took 20 hours of training. You learn in conceal carry class to avoid using a firearm unless your life or the life of others is in danger and that would include a person or gang of persons forcefully entering a person’s home. Our police force has a record of slow response to 911 calls.

      I recommend conceal carry training to anyone who owns a gun. Probably half the class did not obtain the permit.

      A properly drawn firearm in the hands of a skilled and determined homeowner is a formidable deterrent. Once the trigger is pulled, it will bring a lawsuit and possible criminal charges. It is a heavy responsibility. It is a right I support.

      1. I still like where I used to live here in Oklahoma. The fewest LOE in the state. A reliable at least 2 hour response time.

        Everyone in & out of the county knew it was that way & didn’t go screwing around anywhere near there as most everyone was armed.

        OK & I think going on 30 other States are now Con. Carry now.

        I don’t know how many do as it’s a big hunk of iron that might accidentally blow your toe off yet some people have them at the ready with young kids raised to respect/beware of them. It’s everyone’s Right, not the govt or any some one person’s Right to throw away.

        Those kids know what’s going on when the see/help clean a deer taken for food.

        1. Correction:

          A reliable at least 1/2 hour – 2 hour response time.

          I think that county is larger then a few East Coast States, way more cows then people & if LE was working something more important they just couldn’t get there quicker.

    1. This black gentleman works in education in Mechanicsville, VA. He and his wife supported Youngkin, because they see having school choice within public schools as a very important option, as well as vaccine mandates and mask wearing.

    2. Estovir,

      I think it good news.

      When the new Gov gets sworn in he should move to Get Rid of Machine Voting, Tighten up on who can vote by mail, clean up all the protocols, and a complete audit of this election & 11/3/2020 election.

  4. Sorry for my cynicism, but there are only 2 SCOTUS justices who reliably rule in accordance with the Constitution as written and originally intended: Thomas and Alito.

    1. Exactly who the —- do the Justices of the Supreme Court think they are?

      They have no concept of American freedom, they have no understanding that they have no power to wield, and they support the principles of the Communist Manifesto, which illicitly holds dominion in America.

      The Justices of the SCOTUS took an oath to support the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution, not to modify, modify through “interpretation,” amend, violate or subvert the Constitution.

      Justices who violate the Constitution, which provides the requirement for Justices to take the oath, must be impeached and convicted with extreme prejudice for abuse of power, usurpation of power, dereliction of duty, defection, treason etc.

      The SCOTUS is not elected and is not subject to any control other than impeachment – a process which must be streamlined and accelerated to accommodate the increasing demand.

      “…courts…must…declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void.”

      “…men…do…what their powers do not authorize, [and] what they forbid.”

      “[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”

      – Alexander Hamilton

  5. “The Association previously challenged a New York law that imposed stringent conditions on the ability of gun owners to even transport their guns outside of their homes. The law was viewed by some of us as unconstitutional under existing case law, but New York politicians insisted that it would be defended all the way up to the Supreme Court. However, when the Court called their bluff and accepted the case, those politicians quickly changed the law and pulled the case before the Court could rule.

    The bait-and-switch incensed members of the Court who delayed in the dismissal of the case. ”
    It’s not nice to fool Mother Justice!

  6. I’m surprised by the reluctance, on both sides, to address the original intent of the Amendment according to, not the least of whom, is the author of the 2nd Amendment George Mason. It is this: The United States Army is to be our defense against foreign usurpers. The armed militia is our defense against domestic usurpers: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” is exactly what it means. Quit pussyfooting around. When asked what the militia was, Mason replied, “It is the whole people with the exception of a few public officials.” Everybody understand? It is particularly applicable in present circumstances. Those who presumed themselves empowered to rule capriciously, for their own benefit, at the expense of the citizens whose consent they no longer consider consequential, will find to their sudden horror, the reason more experienced rulers lived in castles.

    1. There’s more to that sentence, and it is additive to your point but distinct: …the right of the people…

    2. “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

      Does it say “the right of the Army?” No

      Does it say “the right of the militia”? No

      Does it say “the right of the elites”? No

      It says the right “of the people”. This phrase is used repeatedly throughout the Constitution, and it referred to every citizen.

      As for the preceding phrase about the Militia, Militias were historically comprised of citizens, as opposed to a regular army. Armed citizens could easily form a militia to oppose a tyrannical government. Having just won a revolutionary war against a tyrannical government, by means of a militia comprised of average, every day citizens, including farmers, clerks, blacksmiths, silver smiths, glass blowers, coopers, sail makers, etc, the right for every citizen to keep and bear arms would be foremost in their minds.

      As well, recall Culloden of 1745. The Scotts tried to rise against British tyranny, throw off the British king, and try to reinstall their own rightful king. They made excellent progress, but failed on Culloden Moor. The Brits punished them severely. It was a crime punishable by death for a Highlander to possess a firearm. And why was that? Because they didn’t want them to take up arms against their tyrannical government. They wanted their subjects meek and disarmed. The Scotts were prohibited from owning guns, wearing clan tartan (as it implied an allegiance other than to the British monarchy), or speaking Gaelic (can’t have the downtrodden speaking secrets in front of you).

      The Founders were well aware of this, as it was the policy of the British Monarchy to disarm in order to subjugate. The Founders never wanted to be subjugated again.

      Given the far Left, authoritarian direction the government has been going, we Americans would be foolish to disarm.

      1. Karen, you need to stop this “we Americans” sh*t right now. You are a blind Trump disciple. Neither you nor Fox News nor the Republican Party speak for most Americans. The only “authoritarian” that Americans should worry about is Trump, a fat, incompetent liar, dictator wannabe who cheats, lies, and who was impeached twice. His incompetence is directly responsible for 130,000 unnecessary COVID deaths alone. He trashed a successful economy, and tried to bully election officials and cheat to stay in office. He started an insurrection when he lost the presidency, and he had to be threatened with forcible eviction if he refused to leave the White House. That’s the very definition of “authoritarianism”.

  7. The leftist are terrified because they see States flexing their governing muscles. Abortion, Gun rights,and private property protection, are just a few.

    States are leading the way on protecting life. States are leading the way in removing restrictions on guns. Every time a State removes another unconstitutional restriction, the left howls about blood in the streets…but crime goes down, not up.

    When SCOTUS has collective constipation and decided Kelo, dozens of States stepped up and passed laws protecting private property from illegal takings. Overruling a stupid decision.

    The left does not condone federalism and is increasingly apoplectic over the hint of States finding their collective voice in fighting back against an overreaching federal legislature, and bureaucracy.

  8. The Constitution has been under attack even before its enactment. The continued assaults are multi faceted including the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth, Tenth, and Fourteenth Amendments, other Amendments could arguably been included.

    Is the Second Amendment in today’s world sufficient to throw off a Despotic Governance? No amount of 5.56 or 7.62mm Long Rifles, Shotguns or Side Arms a Militia may possess will ever impact the United States Government resources to defeat a militia. The only honest argument for the Second Amendment regardless of the word Militia, are the final four words

    ‘shall not be infringed.’

    Until the Second Amendment is modified or revoked any attempt to limit or remove the right to bear arms should be found unconstitutional, whether by Federal, State or Local Laws or ordnances.

    The continued assault on the Constitution of Greatest Country to ever exist by the Democratic Party and its Woke Tyrants must be arrested and cast aside with derision, mockery and ridicule.

    1. Rifles in the form of AK47s played a big role in the defeat of U.S. arms in Vietnam and more recently in Afghanistan.

      1. In strictly military terms, is defeat the same as quitting?

        America just up and went home.

        All I ever saw was Charlie get torn a new ——- and run away, sometimes dropping his AK and leaving his Ho Chi Minh sandals right there on the trail.

        American Deaths – 58,000

        Vietnamese Deaths – 1,353,000

        Looks like Vietnam won, huh?

        “Guenter Lewy in 1978 estimated 1,353,000 total deaths in North and South Vietnam during the period 1965–1974 in which the U.S. was most engaged in the war.”

        – Wiki

      2. Within a fire-fight it comes down to how many combatants, guns and bullets each side has and the attrition of the combatants. A rifle, (even a Machine Gun), have no standing once artillery is employed, tanks, howitzers or other heavy equipment. America lost in Viet Nam and I suppose in Afghanistan for the same reason, leadership that was not willing to use whatever force necessary to win.

        As George Patton said “engagements, battles, wars that were fought quickly, decisively, and with brute force saved lives in the long run.”

        As an aside I served in Viet Nam during TET 1968.

        1. America lost in Viet Nam and I suppose in Afghanistan for the same reason, leadership that was not willing to use whatever force necessary to win.

          Yes, Civilian control of the Military is an important feature. But recent history has defined to costs. IF the civilians had a bit of a brain, they would understand they don’t have requisite character to do what is necessary to use the full force of the military, and not start a kinetic military exercise.

  9. “There’s nothing you can know that isn’t known”

    “Nothing you can see that isn’t shown”

    – John Lennon, 1967

    It is not complex; it is not unintelligible.

    Americans have the absolute right, not qualified by the Constitution, to keep and bear arms.

    That one doesn’t like it is eminently immaterial and does not modify or mitigate the full force and weight of the literal “manifest tenor” of the 2nd Amendment.

    The judicial branch has no power to legislate, modify legislation or modify legislation through “interpretation.”

    The sole charge and duty of the Supreme Court is to assure that actions comport with law.

    Any Justice who entreats against the right to keep and bear arms subverts the Constitution, is in violation of his constitutional oath to support the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution and must be immediately impeached and convicted for abuse of power, usurpation of power, dereliction of duty, defection, treason, etc.

    The singular American failure has been the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court, since 1860; it continues as such to this writing.

  10. Thankfully, there has been an awakening in recent years, particularly since the peak of the the pandemic, among “normies” who are now realizing there is great evil in the world at the top of the food chain and the rest of us are forced to fight or be subjugated. One does not need to wear a tinfoil hat to come to the conclusion that the globalist elites are ushering forward policies that benefit them alone, relegating the rest of us to serfdom.

    Elites don’t like their serfs armed.

    1. Olly says:

      “Elites don’t like their serfs armed.”

      Who can blame them? White Supremacists didn’t want their slaves to learn to read or write much less be armed. At least, elites nowadays are for education- of course not the education you would prefer- “Natural Rights.”

      Remind me again- how did black human beings *loose* their “Natural Rights” during 200+ years of slavery or did they never have them?

        1. Oky1 blurts:

          “Of course Islamic Nut Job Marxist don’t like White People or their “Rights”.”

          Get ahold of yourself man! I know you think I’m an “American Marxist” ever since Mark Levin hammered the slur into your head, but where do get “Islamic Nut Job” from? Who filled your noggin with that new slur? Say!

      1. Didn;t just read a post from you decrying the hyperbole of those on the right ?

        I have heard absolutely nothing from David Dukes or Richard Spensor for about a decade.

        Where are these “white supremecists” that you are ranting about ?

        The current leader of the “proud boys” is hispanic and clearly NOT white.
        Whatever else might be true of the proud boys – the “white supremecist” claim seems to be a lead zepplin.

        Leftists like you spray about terms like white supremecists as if there are KKK members and neo nazi’s under every bush.

        If you wish to be treated as sane – do not spray the web with insantiy.

        I hope that Jeff Silberman isnot your real name – as if it is, you are dragging your posts arround like an anchor forever.

        And where are these slaves ?

        Elites have been “for education” for the past 50 years – during which education spending adjusted for inflation has doubled, and the quality of education by every measure has declined.

        The greatest success stories in education today – especially for poor and minorities have been charter schools – particularly cyber charters – which in my state have taken students from the worst performing schools in the state and brought them up to state averages.

        If you are a parent with a child in school and you hope to see your child well educated – run as far and fast as you can from “the elites”

        You seem to confuse what people say with what they do.

        Absolutely the “‘elites” say they are for education. Absolutely they “say” conservatives are not.
        But the elites have ruined the education they say they are for.
        Currently the best hope for better education is with those the elites say are against education.

        Absolutely I would prefer that our children were taught that man has free will – if you have any knowledge of the subject the alternatives are dreadful.

        The entire concept of morality requires free will.

        As to natural rights – would you prefer “endowed by their creator with inalienable rights” ?

        Or would you prefer that your children are taught that white people are evil and non-whites (except asians) are all opressed, and there is nothing that can be done about this except persecute evil white people ?

        But mostly I would prefer that our schools teach students to read, to write and to do arithmetic.

        WHEN they can manage to do that well, they can try some actual science, and actual history.
        and maybe some logic, and critical thinking.

        Like how to recognize when you are being lied to.

      2. How did black people lose their rights during the period of american colonial slavery ?

        I had to add a bunch of qualifiers – because slavery has existed for 150,000 years. Every races has enslaved every other race.

        Those blacks you speak of were enslaved by other blacks in africa – that is how they lost their rights.

        In fact the concept of natural rights that you are pissing on while starting to emerge a several thousands of years ago with the jews in the middle east, really only took significant form with the scottish enlightenment.

        And it would be the rise of the scottish enlightenment and “natural rights” that brought humans to the recognition that slavery was immoral – BECAUSE it was a violation of natural rights.

        Remember that I said that AFTER students were taught reading, writing and arithmatic we could move on to history.

        You seem to have failed history.
        The rise of natural rights WAS the end of slavery.

      3. Our daily Whataboutism. This dude has Tourettes, but with whataboutisms. Every day, the same old crap. Thanks for reinforcing what needs to be cleaned up in our neighborhood.

        Pssst: there are still a lot of blacks enslaved in this world, just not in the US. Only in the US are their natural rights enshrined.

    1. This case portends to be a crushing blow to Democrat anti gun philosophy.

      So does today’s election in Virginia. The weather today throughout Virginia is rain…all day.

      D is for Desperate Democrats In Ol Dominion.

      “Virginia Dem caught by police tampering with campaign signs hours before heated election”

      A Democratic Virginia delegate was pulled over by police less than 24 hours before Election Day after a deputy witnessed a woman taking campaign signs and getting into a car the delegate was driving.

      Delegate Chris Hurst was pulled over by police in Radford, Virginia, on Monday evening after a deputy with the Radford Sheriff’s office saw a woman taking campaign signs that were on display outside the city recreation center and then getting into a car Hurst was driving, according to Radford Sheriff Mark Armentrout.

      Police found that Hurst was driving the vehicle with a suspended license, and he was given a “driving while suspended notification” by a deputy, local outlets report.

  11. When the Second Amendment was verbally agreed on in a meeting they said to the court reporter:. ,..”.right to arm bears”. Not “bear arms”. The language was printed wrongly.
    Arm your brown bear in the woods and put him in your militia.

  12. Turley’s hypocrisy has become laughable. He’s actually complaining about the State of New York “gaming the system”, but has nothing whatsoever to say about the appeal of Texas’s effort to circumvent Roe v. Wade. Oral argument was broadcast in real time yesterday, and even the radical conservatives acknowledged the imminent danger of states circumventing SCOTUS cases by passing laws to overrule legal precedent on matters they don’t like and then delegating enforcement to bounty hunters. Then, there’s the effort to prevent “preclusive effect” of court losses and other efforts to circumvent constitutional precedent. But, he got in a few licks at the State of New York, another target for Trumpists, because New York is going after him for tax evasion, among other crimes. Trump isn’t welcome in New York. Yeah, Turley, that’s just what New York needs–a bunch of pea brains packing their six-shooters (or automatics), pretending they are the Lone Ranger. But, Turley has to paint the cases as a “big win” for the Second Amendment. It’s his job.

  13. Let’s endorse the theory, “fraud vitiates all contracts.” You and I appear in Amendment X of The United States of America’s Constitution. Apart from that, we are the beneficiaries of a contract federally between the Congress assembled as The United States of America and its creation the United States. This is an un-incorporated government service company. Located in Washington District of Columbia. We are party to the actual, lawful Constitution of our State. That is one autonomous nation state among the several states of the Union.

    Most importantly you and I are Sovereigns without subject or ruler. Most people are actually persons, they have not gained sufficient knowledge to declare their status and just roll along giving lip service. PINO Patriot in name only. A free man, woman and child can expatriate from the ALL CAP CORPORATE FICTION of the de facto. Then they may enter the de jure. It is a good idea to read the complete definitions of de facto and de jure in a Law dictionary. I use Black’s 6th.

    We do not need a license, certificate, registration, permission, rules, ordinances, statutes or regulation to comport ourselves properly. When we are private, such as in a PMA private membership assembly, we need no 501 C3 or C8 or any public status declaration. Members of the general public and public at large are private.
    I CLAIM!
    All power is inherent in the people. The United States is a legal fiction created by the several states in union together in a Congress Assembled under the Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union. The Union is styled The United States of America. It!! as a group created the Constitution which created the United States.

    The last lawful State is Oregon. There is only color of law from Washington District of Columbia since March 1861. That is the location of the United States.

    A path to returning to a United States as a Constitutionally bound government is: to assemble a quorum of the several states that were States, in 1860 prior to South Carolina seceding. However a Civilian Court of record is required to implement Ex Parte Milligan and nullify martial law/Lieber code and FEMA. In the de facto and establishing the fact in the de jure.
    Therefore, we have 33 lawful states. A lawful quorum can open a lawful Congress. That precludes color of law.

    The elected delegate from the Congress Assembled is titled President of The United States of America.

    Promulgate to your heart’s content. I am finding no rebuttal.

  14. How can you overplay your hand in these matters when you have a monopoly on knowledge and virtue?

  15. Lefties have a strange view of the Constitution.

    They perceive rights in the “penumbra”, whatever that means other than a mother’s right to kill her unborn child.

    But they are unable to follow clearly articulated rights like the 2nd.

    A reasonable person might conclude that Lefties are disingenuous.

Comments are closed.