Everybody knows that the Supreme Court is going to BAN Semi-Auto Shotguns by Monday RIGHT????????????

Titor right again?

WTF?!? Please explaine.

Excellent. They can have mine-business end first.

What are you talking about, the new assualt weapons ban be introduced by an Ill. Republican. Nothing in the news with Supreme Court besides the DC gun ban which the NRA is going to win

Read the text and you'll see it's not about "assault weapons" they've added a TON of new TERMS that literally ban guns of lower calibers and hunting guns.

I Believe they have been banned in OZ for some time now.

It's too little too late. Haven't you read the RBS alert? The S is HTF! Look around you. Look at the headlines. This is what it looks like when the SHTF.

Stock up now on guns and ammunition, folks. I recommend the HK91 as a good End of World, Mad Max Road Warrior all-purpose battle rifle. You can't break it. It's not exactly the most ergonomically correct long rifle, but with countersniper capabilities and a general insensitivity to dirt, grit and carbon, it'll get you through times of scarcity of parts. If you can't afford one, check out the Imbel FAL for mostly the same reasons. Note, you can get a lemon Imbel.

They can have mine when they pry it out of my cold dead fingers. I'll be taking a few of them with me though.

Do you have a link to this horse shit you say?

The NRA are behind the legislation.Drop NRA now and join GOA.

So....are you telling me thhat the Supe-ream Court is going to vote on the newest anti-gun legislation that they have drafted? Pleasae explain how this mechanism of democracy has evolved for them to do ban semi-autos; then go study Roget's

So....are you telling me thhat the Supe-ream Court is going to vote on the newest anti-gun legislation that they have drafted? Pleasae explain how this mechanism of democracy has evolved for them to do ban semi-autos; then go study Roget's

ding ding ding!!!

Big talk from our resident idiot.
People like you are justifying these laws.
Law abiding citizens suffer because of it.

Just keep in mind, an ATF sniper can down you at 500 yards without a problem, and thats what would end up happening to you.

The smart thing to do would be to keep your mouth shut and your firearms in good working order somewhere where they cant be detected by magnetometers.
But then you're not that smart, are ya?

Bull$h1T

and besides, my mossberg 590 is SLIDE ACTION....

fool...

Don't believe me Nigga?



June 17, 2008

The Second Amendment: What a Difference a Comma MakesPrint This
E-mail This
Gregory D. Lee


The Supreme Court's upcoming decision in a Washington, D.C. handgun ban case could potentially nullify thousands of gun laws on the books. The case stems from a security guard who was denied a request to keep a firearm in his District residence for self-protection.

Washington D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty recently said that the District's handgun ban "has saved many lives since 1976 and will continue to do so if allowed to remain in force." How does he measure that? The truth is that murder by handguns has gone up substantially in the District since the handgun ban was passed. I wonder how many honest people in the District were killed by thugs with guns because they were deprived of the ability to adequately defend themselves.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution reads in its entirety: "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."

What is it about "shall not" the anti-gun crowd doesn't understand? For years they have argued that the Second Amendment doesn't apply to individual gun ownership, when the comma between the words "free state" and "the right" clearly shows that the framers of the Constitution were masters of brevity and were addressing two different issues they obviously did not want tampered with. Some might not like what the amendment says, but it doesn't change the fact that it says it.

Let's suppose there is a constitutional amendment that reads: A well regulated free government health care system, being necessary to the health of the people, the right of women to have abortions on demand, shall not be infringed. Would the typical anti-gun advocate suddenly understand what "shall not" and "infringe" mean? Would conservative pro-gunners argue that abortions could be regulated, denied or restricted at every level of government?

In the worst case scenario for anti-gunners, the Supreme Court could negate all gun laws on the books because the Second Amendment is the gun law of the land. Keeping and bearing arms shall not be infringed. Gun laws infringe that right. Any law contrary to that is obviously unconstitutional. The amendment doesn't say the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed except if you are a juvenile or a mental patient or live in the District of Columbia. It doesn't restrict convicted criminals from keeping and bearing arms either.

The ramifications of this decision could be enormous. "Keeping" and "bearing" arms are two different issues. Keeping arms would allow citizens to maintain a firearm in their residence, tent, vehicle, boat or other conveyance. Bearing arms could be interpreted as legally carrying firearms in public. Concealed weapon permits would be a thing of the past because they are designed by state governments to infringe residents from bearing firearms.

Should mentally deranged people, organized street gang members or convicted felons be allowed to carry concealed firearms? I don't think so. But they may suddenly regain that right. The Supreme Court could place restrictions on firearm ownership the same way it restricts free speech by excluding libel, slander and yelling fire in a crowded theater when there isn't one. But those restrictions came after decades of rulings handed down by the Court. It seems to me that the only constitutional way to restrict gun ownership is to have a separate amendment that specifies when a person loses his Second Amendment rights.

Even if all gun laws were declared unconstitutional, gun violence would probably not increase significantly because criminals have never followed gun laws, so why would they start now?

No matter where you stand on the issue, it will be exciting to see where the Justices stand on the literal interpretation of the Constitution.

[link to www.familysecuritymatters.org]

Oh look-it's IDW, GLP's resident racist and wackjob.

500 yards eh IDW??? Ya fucking idiot, I shot Camp Perry you fucking clown and am good for near twice that in the right weather conditions. Fuck F troop, history has proved them....incompetent.

Yeah eventually they'd get me, but I'd take several with me.
There are worse ways to go down assclown-hey-a worthless piece of shit like you would probable choke and shoot yourself in all the cowardice I know you are.


Hey, hows that Fed watch on your stupid ass going, eh???

See any more unmarked white jets flying so low circling your crib that you could see the pilots joo eyes IDW, eh???

Jooooooooooooooooooozzzzz!!!!!! Hahahahahaha! Fucking Idiot.


Hahahahahahahahahahaah-comedy gold. One of the funniest twist off's from a quintessential tard that I have ever seen in my 18 years on the internet.

You are the reference tard. All tards strive to match your.....bile actually.

You exemplify ignorance, racism, and plain stupidity. Do us all a big favor.

Don't breed, mkay assmunch?

Sorry, ATF typically trains at 200 yards, not 500.

What do you think your going to do, go to war against the U.S. Military.
You won't last the night.
If the military shows up at your door step and ask for your gun, are you going to shoot them? I don't think so.
And don't say your going to hide your guns because all they need to do is look you up in the gun registery and ask for the gun that you just bought a year ago.

"They can have mine when they pry it out of my cold dead fingers. I'll be taking a few of them with me though."

Good stuff. Solves two problems at once. Removes the gun from circulation and removes the macho idiot who thinks it necessary to own an arsenal.

What the fuck do you need a semi automatic shotgun for. Certainly not hunting unless you are a dangerously bad shot, and then you shouldn't have a shotgun in your hands.
Semi auto's are only good for killing people, and no citizen should own a weapon whose only purpose is to kill other people.

I'm a bit sick of the week kneed dribble dicks who think they are big men because they have a lot of weapons. It demonstrates the exact opposite. It's the belligerent attitude of the gun owners that's disturbing. All this bullshit about needing weapons to keep the government honest is mythology from the past. You just use them to kill each other indisciminatorily. In fact, its the reactionaries with the guns. So they would use them to defend the most corrupt and foul government, just like they support Bush.

Gentlemen the wild west ended 150 years ago, time to grow up.

Judaism isn't a race, it's a disease of the mind concealed withen a religion. The fact that you think I'm a 'whack job' is a result of your own delusional thinking.




HORSE MANURE, you're nothing but a blowhard , you.re not even in the United States.




I doubt it, since you're on thier team.


Cowardice? LMAO!



I wouldn't know, and don't care.


Jew eyes?
What a fucking dickweed! I dount it would have been the eyes that gave him away , assuming of course I made such a statement. Fact is it's like everything else you claim about anyone awake, a total misrepresentation of the truth. But then you can't operate with integrity, can you?


Antisemites!!!!!!! ....And you are an idiot, jewsucker.


Yeah, and George Bush thinks Vladimir Putin is an idiot. Its all relative but we know who the idiot really is, don't we?



I have a sugestion...get off the meds...

Maybe, but I wouldnt want to go blowing off at the mouth about how I intended to kill them with a shotgun anyway, semiauto or otherwise, would you?
The whole point is he has justified not only his own death at thier hands, he has vilified gun owners as lawless fucktards who dont have the responsibility to own guns.
You become part of that which you defend.Omega has repreatedly threatened to kill people for what he percieves as wrongs against himself.
If the Supreme court were to rule autoloading shotguns illegal (which is highly unlikely in the extreme), that would become the law of the land. Right or wrong , he would die if he resisted confiscation, assuming of course he is American. (he isnt)

The origional message of this thread is pure bullshit, so what are you monkeys arguing about?

WHAT ABOUT MACHETEES?

Read Omegas' bullshit doom threads on the economy, and then consider his stance on firearms ownership.
He's here to make gun owners look like unstable nuts, and he's good at that at least.

Good question.
THe supreme court is not even ruling on autoloading firearms ownership at all.
It's like everything else on this forum, propaganda designed to get people to say things that incrimidate them.

That's good because I have 2 of them and don't want to give them up.