More insanity from one of obama's finest.

Illegals Can Carry Guns

That sounds like a favorable ruling for the right to bear arms. The 2nd doesn't mention citizenship status. And if he can carry so can we.

The question is why don't we haul an illegal back to the closest place on the border a evict them.

Some members believe this is a good idea and also foolishly believe this decision supports our fight to prevent further erosion of our second amendment.


They don't see how arming 60,000 Chinese men of military age,who have illegally crossed our border,could be potentially harmful.

This section of I 70....known as cocaine alley....I travel on a regular basis

110 miles of wide open/empty Utah....yes I carry.....

I have stopped on numerous occasions for a disabled/parked vehicles

1-2 times I remember as questionable

With whats going on in America now...my generosity has made me think

Most recently...a guy & his dog hitch hikin' a ride on an I 70 west bound ramp

I was headed west...stopped.....gave him him a sandwich & Gatoraide & a bottle of water for his dog

He was thankful......but ya never know

https://www.deseret.com/2013/9/23/20526064/about-utah-no-bull-no-service-for-106-miles/

More here

This is a set up, it will of course lead to more gun control.

California has illegal police officers.

Since when do non citizens have any rights?

Yep.

Now, what would happen to any one of us if we were caught carrying a firearm during the commission of a crime?

hmmm.

Is crossing the border illegally a felony? I guess they would have to be adjudicated “guilty” of a felony to prohibit them from carrying a firearm.

finally , the crux of it

I struggle to understand how the US Constitution applies to people that aren't US Citizens and are here "illegally".

It's a misdemeanor.

It would seem to me that if you aren't a citizen of the United States you have no rights guaranteed to citizens by our constitution.

That's what our founding fathers were thinking thinking, the Constitution is for US Citizens

Read the declaration of independence. Then tell yourself that it was written before the revolution, before the constitution.

So much wrong with this you can't even make it up.

Came into country illegally, I'm assuming fake ID,etc. How did he get the gun?

They want to take mine but this spic can break federal laws and be protected by our constitution when he's not even a [bleep] citizen

This shidt pisses me off

HE WAS FOUND IN CHICAGO CARRYING A GUN!


And we are in high court over his status?


Let's see.
If he was 6th generation Chicagoian (sp?),
He probably would have had a hard time buying that pistol, (legally)
and couldn't have gotten a carry permit.

Since he is "Out of State" in every state, he can't legally buy a pistol.

Illegal gun, in 2 ways, not legal to carry without a license.

Why is his citizenship status even a thing.

Last time I bought a firearm, I filled out a 4473. Thereon I was asked "Are you a citizen?" "Are you in this country illegally?"

I was also asked "Are you Hispanic?"

Maybe the question regarding Hispanic was so that I could still be approved even if I answered positively to 21N. :sarcasm off:

Just like now non binary is on the 4473 for the sex question. Guess that eliminates any mental illness stipulations

The 2nd does not refer to citizenship as for as rights are concerned. The "people" is what it says. Upon questioning by law enforcement a person does not have to make statements no matter his status. I'll take a look but I don't think the bill of rights refers to citizenship as pertains to government power over an individual.

Another Sheeboon Originalist courtesy of the Senate Representing The District of Corruption..

Ladies and Gentlemen these People You keep sending as Representatives are Grifter’s, Malcontents, Flim Flam’s and Traitor's if this is what You Like believe Me the Best is Yet to Cum ..

Boom Shuck a Lucka

Hahahaha Hahahaha

Baghdad Bob about to Sing

Funny how obama's finest just skips those parts.

Incredible.

Word

They’re just looking for a loophole to get Crackhead Hunter’s Felony Gun Crime dismissed. 😜😡

Well, it is CHITCAGO. Where Illegals can become LEO and Felonious Negros all carry guns.

Chitcago and the Idiotic State of Illinois is only interested in prosecuting Legal Gun Owners.

Hope the Groids and Illegals they love so much burn that SCHITTHOLE to the ground.

Marxist victory in action.

In reality the BOR is written for all humans. Being born human is all that is needed to be afforded inalienable rights. While our BOR is only recognized inside our borders, it is applicable to all within those borders.

Being illegal and carrying a firearm are two entirely separate issues and should not be conflated.

Keep the illegals out, deport the ones who manage to sneak in. But recognize their basic human rights while they are here. Anything less is simply unAmerican.

The Declaration of Independence is not law. It is one of our founding documents but since we were part of England at the time it had no legal standing. The Constitution on the other hand is the supreme law of the land. Big difference there.

I agree with you

It’s crazy, I see people debating on it. But there’s nothing to debate about. As a I.S citizen I bet you can just waltz into any country with a gun, why would Juan who doesn’t speak/able to construct basic grammar allowed to carry arms? Why do they have any rights? Gosh!

People that invade our borders are not afforded citizenship. They do not enjoy any protection from the Constitution that citizens have. By law they should be arrested and deported not rewarded with citizen's rights.

Wow, so “Mr no speaka da english “ can carry a gun. He wont be held responsible since he cant understand commands from LEO. He cant read signs that prohibit carrying in a firearm. Seems a recent court case let off a illegal for just this reason.

Can't find anything to disagree with there, other than a lackluster emphasis on the fact that the first thing that should happen when an illegal is discovered by a US authority is apprehension and deportation, thus making this issue entirely moot.

Once again, their side has outmaneuvered our side. To the victors go the spoils. We will garnish these people with everything available.

Lol

It’s not a basic human right for an illegal alien to be armed in the US.

What they are doing is watering down what it means to be a US citizen to the point there are no distinctions.

Other than basic humanitarian rights i.e. not captured and sold into slavery, or subjected to torture, non-citizens should not be afforded the protections of our constitution. IMHO

People need to realize that if Chinese men of military age are being sent to the US for bad reasons, China wasn't planning on having them buy guns at Joe's House of Pew. There's another plan. Illegals, regardless of nation of origin are NOT going to line up en-mass to get Glocks at Cabela's. They'll get them the same way urban youths will. And the .gov, once finding an illegal with a weapon isn't going to yeet them to Mexico now all of the sudden. They'll let them stay the same as they always have.

Some people realize that while non-citizens shouldn't 1. be here and 2. be armed - that there are unintended consequences of his judge's ruling and those unintended consequences CAN be and SHOULD be exploited by those trying to retain our Republic. If we have the guts.


1. Non-Citizens can have guns and saying they can't due to a status is an infringement and thus unconstitutional (the ruling) means that any restriction on citizens is ALSO unconstitutional. Ages, locations, concealed or not, handgun or not, suppressed or not etc.

2. Non-Citizens can not have guns and aren't afforded protection under the US Constitution (an appeal of the ruling done by the .gov once they realize #1 is now the situation) means they ALSO have no right to due process (can be deported immediately), 4th amendment, VOTING, etc which kills their base.

So which is it Biden administration - which one do you want to tolerate or advocate for?

Well hell! If they can carry a gun, the constitution also says they can vote!

Unreal. This is the state trying its damn best to make resident gun owners felons because they have a black rifle, big magazine or threaded barrel. Also, nonresident aliens can now become police officers.
Think about this: an armed nonresident alien police officer arrests you for having a legally purchased semiauto AR15 that you didn't register during the required time period. Or a Walter PPK/S 22 that has a threaded barrel.
That is Illinois, land of Lincoln and multiple jailed governors.

He had a smart lawyer, and a judge who followed the law... as written. The U.S. Supreme Court heard and gave its rulings on this twice I believe. The last I believe in 2018 or 2019 involving a person that was an international student here on a F1 visa that had recently expired.


Phil

Then why can't those in jail have guns?

Nothing lackluster about it. It is written in plain English.

Just meant I'd have said it with more emphasis.

Due process of law

I would have said it with more emphasis also, had I said it.

But I wrote it. The keyboard has no volume control.

I believe the qualifications for voting is a state issue. Back before the 19th amendment an individual state such as Wyoming could allow women to vote when they couldn't in other states.

States decide who can vote.

LOL. You typed it.

Because they're in jail. Once they've served their time/paid their debt to society and are again free, they have the same right and interest in self preservation as anyone else. Of course the gov't says no, a convicted felon has lost that right but they've been twisting and lying about the 2nd to suit for eons. If we are to argue the right to arms/self defense is an inalienable, God given right, then every living soul walking this earth has it, regardles of what goverenments may say.

We shouldn't offer constitutional rights to non citizens or illegals.

Maybe so, but that might require an amendment specifying what rights are reserved for citizens of the USA. At the time the constitution was written the citizens considered themselves citizens of their respective states more than they did the U.S.

We might ought not go down the road of disqualifying certain people the right to be armed unless maybe as punishment for a crime of violence. And that disqualification is already in play.

Unless you want the whole camel in the tent it would be wise to not to let him get his nose in.

Another step closer to their "right" to vote.

Certainly makes a mockery of the 4473 and background checks.

Tell me something. Can you find any prohibition in the U.S. constitution that would stop a state from allowing non citizens the right to vote?

The gleeful arrest of a US citizen for possessing a firearm wouldn't require an illegal alien in a police uniform.

You mean 2 infringements against the 2A?

Can those in jail come and go as they please?

Or are you wanting life for citizens to be more like being in jail with not being able to move about as a restriction?

.gov doesn't create rights.

I’d rather illegals have gun rights than most my neighbors have voting rights.

Doesn't much matter anymore.

We are never going to vote our way out of this, and trying to "go back to the Constitution" ain't gonna do us any good at all now.

It's way too late for that.

I agree.

I'd hate to see what would happen to me if I was caught in Chicago carrying a gun. If states can infringe on citizens rights to carry in their states how come they are being stopped from infringing on illegal aliens rights. It just makes no sense. If a Mexican can carry in Chicago why can't I?

I think the right to defend one's self is a human right and good people around the world should be allowed to carry a gun to protect themselves if they have not committed violent crimes. But that's unfortunately not how most of the world sees it and I know there's something sinister behind the left pushing for illegals rights after years of not recognizing law abiding citizens rights. They want the crime and chaos to increase to justify their next big Crack down.

Bb

The enemy isn’t at our “gates”, the enemy is within us. I couldn’t write a better plot for a movie than what’s being done to our once great Country. A pox on ALL of the Leftist scum that allows an armed invasion of our Country!

I work at a LGS in the Suburbs East of NYC (about 35miles). I had THREE illegals in my shop just yesterday inquiring about handguns. I sent them to the local licensing Police Dept. Let them deal with them. Fortunately, you need a green card to get a pistol license in NY. I’m not a fan of that either. What Country in their right mind would arm tens of thousands (if not more) of foreign nationals (legal or not)?????!!!!!! Just seems insane! Almost like intentional ruination.

took the words right out of my mouth. This is intentional but to what end? It can only end badly for everyone.

Ted Curse and Little Marco know what’s going to Happen..

This ain’t Rocket Science..

Minute Men ..

Sadly, me too.

Not almost.

The 2A as in inalienable right should help the 6th generation Chicago resident or the 6th generation resident living near Meades Ranch, KS who loses their mind and wants to visit Chicago.

Been saying this for a long time

The end is the end of american civilization as we know it and the end of white folks. That has been the plan for a very long time

2 very important overlapping timelines coming up.

Most "empires" last about 270 years - how long for the US?
Most reserve currencies last about 100 years - how long for the US? When do they overlap?

What happens when one or the other ends to the country in question? At BEST I give us to 2030 before serious, open low/medium level of armed conflict across the US (geographically)

Trump gets back in - the US is going to get very Western, very quick. 2020 BLM style but on a MASSIVE scale. Much more than just the lib strongholds.

Teal: The ANTIFA riots are going to break out by mid summer at the latest. Hope I'm wrong, but it's the nazi mode of operandi. The U.S. version of the Brown Shirts are ironically calling themselves anti-fascist

This next election will be the defining moment of whether that is true or not.

Ted Curse Knows

Little Marco Knows

Josh Hee Haw Knows

Susan Pylons Knows


Even The Amazing Hawaiian Knows

That’s a Dozer..


Hahahaha Hahahaha

It only Hurts when I Laugh

Some states will have you provide you ID. Phone number. These people are accommodated that’s why they come here.

Haha. Yeah.

It's been my first conclusion for years.
Destroy the family, destroy manliness, destroy history, destroy patriotism, destroy religion,
create as much division (diversity?) as possible...

Why?

There is one answer that tops all others by orders of magnitude.

7 years ago I felt we had one foot off the cliff and the other was slipping, Trump gave that foot traction. I don't believe his re-election could put us on firm ground.
That will take something big.
But maybe, re-electing him could help us scratch better footholds.

Almost anything else will put us on a slide to oblivion.

Go ahead and let the illegals own guns- - - - -just don't let them survive if they choose to misuse them. There's no early release from the graveyard!

I guess the intended sarcasm didn’t work in writing.

Yes, indeed.

Actually, it was ANTIFA riots that eventually prompted Germans to join the Brownshirts as an opposition to them in the streets, eventually succeeding in pushing ANTIFA (i.e., the Bolshevik rioters) underground. This made the Brownshirts so popular in Germany that their candidate soon rose to the Chancellorship via national elections.

How can he purchase a gun here in the US?

They can’t, Legally.

They’ll just break into law abiding Citizen’s homes & vehicles, and steal them, like all the Negros in Chitcago do. 😡

Other than through an FFL.

The 21 year old age limit on handguns was ruled unconstitutional.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/tactic...-ruled-unconstitutional-brown-v-atf/amp/

There are lots of long standing anti 2a "laws" that obviously violate the infringed part.

"Some arms I keep- - - - -others I bear!" I don't have a problem with wetbacks being armed- - - -just shoot the ones who commit crimes with their guns and be done with it. Same for skinheads, groids, damyankees and Good Ole Boys- - - - -the guns aren't the problem, it's what's being done with them. Dummycraps and RINOs are too stupid to make that distinctiuon.

2nd Amendment is for legalized Americans with citizenship; not for AH that waded the river!!

2nd says "the people" not "the citizens'' of the United States. Let's work on putting pressure on the Mexican government to stop this business of allowing hordes of people from dozens of countries access our border. And instead of all this Ukraine crap and trying to break Russia we should go after whoever is financing the transport of all these desperately poor people through Mexico and to our border. That is who we should break financially.

There is no way Haitians are getting to El Paso without someone or some entity paying their way.

No need to get all upset about this little gun case when thousands are being brought to our border every day to overwhelm our ability to turn them back.

All of this.

And the gun case recognized 2A rights which is much preferred over the frequent claim that the 2A was meant for .gov to armed le and mil.

This cannot be a serious question.

This is in line with illegal invaders becoming cops, it's coming.

Keep seeing this mentioned, but the 2A has nothing to do with arming cops.

This is "the nose under the tent" for illegal invaders to become cops, that's the bigger, unspoken issue.

All they have to do to make them cops and arm them is to call them cops.

Acknowledgement of the 2A is irrelevant to arming cops. In a very real way, the 2A is the polar opposite of arming cops.

I expect that guns are now simply issued to the invaders when they cross the border by one or another multi-lettered agency.

Kinda like the Traitorous Halfican and his Cum Receptacle Eric Holder did with their Treasonous “Fast & Furious” Plot.

Both should be awaiting execution at GITMO for the USBP Agent that was murdered with on of their guns they supplied to our enemies. 😡

That started in 2006.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_scandal

So the gun was stolen and not registered to him and he still walked away because he is a good guy as per the article. He’s a criminal just in the fact he is here illegally and has a gun illegally. So on form4473, if you check the box that says non citizen, you don’t get declined on the sale? What about background check. This just don’t make any sense to me but there again not a lot does anymore in the country.

The only problem in all of that related to the firearm is the stolen part, but that problem is no different than any other stolen item.

All of the rest of it are 2A infringements and should never have existed.

Have you never purchased a firearm (or had one gifted to you) without completing a 4473?????? Or a background check?????

Many of us have. No crime is committed by doing so.

People still place guns in classified ads, Craigslist, etc. Or even walk around at a gunshow carrying the firearm.

I do not have a "registered" gun in my house. About 1/2 do not have a 4473 in my name.

I agree.

HiI see your point.

Since these foreign Nationals are entering our Country illegally (no matter what Liberals/Biden administration say), they cannot legally buy guns (felons can’t buy guns legally). The fact that Illinois is arming them, and I believe it’s Commiefornia that is making them Cops, it just shows that American Taxpayers are directly in the crosshairs of these LIEberal, globalist TURDS!

https://www.foxbangor.com/news/loca...a540a28-e89a-11ee-9bc7-e739a0798b92.html


Any guesses? I heard he stole gun, but unconfirmed. Searches for "Brewer Maine Shooting" mostly result in Waterville mass shooter.

Keep your powder dry.

I missed where Illinois is arming them. Can you link to that?

Or are you meaning you oppose recognition of the 2A?

The illegally entering(basically trespassing) is a problem, recognition of the 2A is not.

The making them cops and arming them has at least nothing to do with the 2A and is really 180° opposite of the 2A as is the case with creating and arming any le/mil regardless of where they are from.

I am WAY pro 2nd Amendement (and I know it doesn’t differentiate between citizens and foreigners), but it’s MY belief that the Constitution should only apply to US CITIZENS. On what sane planet should foreign Nationals (green card or not) be allowed to buy/possess/carry firearms. Remember wwI, wwII, Korea, Vietnam, 9/11…… who other than an idiot would hand the knife to have their own neck slit? Apparently, America 2024!

Random articles, pick your poison:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/u...ight-to-own-guns-judge-rules/ar-BB1kal26

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ju...grenade-crime-fight-former-federal-agent

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/new-la...ts-want-become-police-officers-rcna93493

So are you saying you're all for illegals having guns??

So tell us about all the people you perceived as being illegal aliens you have kidnapped, raped, tortured, enslaved, murdered, or anything else imaginable since someone claimed to be an illegal alien has no rights?

A former federal agent opposes the case acknowledging the 2A as a right? Wow that is a shocker!! How many federal agencies openly oppose the 2A as a right whether someone has US citizenship or not?

I am for acknowledging the 2A as a right and do not support politicians using crime to justify their whims of violating the 2A as a right.

If my options are

A) illegal aliens everywhere and the 2A is a right.

B) illegal aliens everywhere and the 2A is NOT a right, just some .gov privelege that can be extended or revoked on a whim

I will go with "A" every day and twice on Sunday.

I am saying that I fully support the US Constitution as written, until it is amended by the legal processes set forth to do so. And then I will support the amended version.

We can not pick and choose which clauses and subparts to support, or which days on which to support them.

Until it is amended, the Bill of Rights applies to all within our borders. That included the 2'nd.

I am saying that I fully support the US Constitution as written, until it is amended by the legal processes set forth to do so. And then I will support the amended version.

We can not pick and choose which clauses and subparts to support, or which days on which to support them.

Until it is amended, the Bill of Rights applies to all within our borders. That included the 2'nd.[/quote]

I agree. And it should apply to all american citizens, gov offals, military, and anyone in their detention wherever they are in the world or off it.

Just because they're in our country illegally, that does not mean they have rights under our Constitution defined for CITIZENS.

Show me where the rights identified (not granted) in our constitution are reserved to citizens.

The right, is the right of the people. This is interpreted to mean the right of the citizens of the USA.

Felons aren't allowed to possess firearms. Period. End of bullschit conversation.

this article seems to present the most cogent analysis of the question I have seen.
https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1302&context=facpub

According to these folks, the right to vote and hold office, along with the rights of entry and abode are the only 'rights' granted only to US Citizens.
Now bear in mind that even if you have 'rights', your status with regards to current law does offer more curbs. If you are adjudicated a felon, that lets you out of a lot of things, but the basics, speech, association, due process and others are not affected.

I have a feeling that, post Bruen, we are about to find out if those kind of laws will stand scrutiny.

Were there historical analogs when the Constitution was adopted, or was a person who had served their sentence seen as having been punished thoroughly?

The illegals, NGO's, globalists, and communists are laughing at us.

Fortunately, most of them don't have the legal system (as screwed up as it might be) we do, or the Constitution we have.

Congress will just have to get off their asses and pass some Constitutional laws that will pass muster..............good luck with that, eh?

Hard to get off 100% of what you are!

“So tell us about all the people you perceived as being illegal aliens you have kidnapped, raped, tortured, enslaved, murdered, or anything else imaginable since someone claimed to be an illegal alien has no rights?”

I’m not even sure what you’re trying to say!? What “I” perceive doesn’t matter. The FACT is we have Foreign Nationals arriving in our Country ON THE DAILY with NO check/paperwork/visas. Now most may be peaceful, but even if 1 in 10 are criminals, it’s too big of a risk for our National Security!

As far as people that I have “kidnapped, raped, tortured, enslaved, murdered…..”. The answer is NONE! I don’t need Laws to tell me right from wrong. I work 40-50hrs a week, have so for over 40 years. I have no time to cause trouble, and when I’m done working I’m too tired for much other than resting up for the next work day. The same can’t be said for everyone (US Citizens or NOT).

I AM pro immigration, I am NOT ok with unchecked, illegal invasion of the US. The LIEberals seem to be ok with it though. MostlyforCensus/votes/Congressional seats.

I’m convinced that many LIEberal politicians/judges will watch America burn to the ground, as long as they get to rule over the ashes!

The only thing congress passes are bills that put money in their grifter pockets.

Note to add:

A microcosm of the insanity that is happening at our Southern Border (AZ/TX), can be summed up in an example:

In many Liberal Cities, if a criminal breaks into a home, falls and breaks his/her leg, he can sue the homeowner. To me, that is JUsT as insane as letting unchecked/undocumented foreigners into our Country, giving them drivers licenses, ability to vote, and access to firearms. This is PURE INSANITY!!!!

Doyle is as per his usual absolutely completely utterly correct ya gotta watch all the way thru:

If they have no rights then they can be raped, murdered, enslaved, or anything else. Why would that be wrong since they have no legal standing?

And the court case is recent so not sure why everyone making the no rights claim hasn't been having any them.

Some people may think you can hop off a boat and move to New Zealand. Maybe some of our communist politicians should read all of their requirements.

https://www.govt.nz/browse/passport...zenship/requirements-for-nz-citizenship/

So they can be tortured and so on? Why hasn't anyone making the no rights claim been acting on their stated position?

When did that become a thing? It wasn't in the 18th century.

Uh oh

https://www.wdrb.com/in-depth/convi...4c043fc-e2d4-11ee-9b6a-b32c91eed864.html

What year did this start that felons couldn't own firearms and who was President at the time? No one should lose their right to own a firearm once they complete their sentence a lifetime ban is extreme. Does the government really think people obey that law, Imo hell no.

"IF they have no rights then they can be raped, murdered, enslaved, or anything else. Why would that be wrong since they have no legal standing?"

OK, now I see your point, thanks for clarifying. I don't think I, or others on this forum (maybe some), think foreign Nationals have NO rights in the US, just not every right afforded to US Citizens. They shouldn't be able to vote, or have access to firearms, and quite frankly, I don't know how any American citizen wouldn't support that. Just as I wouldn't expect to visit any Country in Europe, Asia, etc. and vote or access firearms. To quote Will Farrell in Zoolander: "I feel like i'm taking crazy pills". :-)

Lolbertarianism is a disease that has wreaked almost as much destruction in America as Bolshevism has. In fact, I consider them to be two sides of the same Satanic shekel.

I still ask how he got the gun? I also would ask all the pro illegal folks on why they are trying to take American 2nd away but illegals are are OK?

I assume this is rhetorical but Doyle answers it clearly in vid I linked above

I'll have to watch it.

Not aware of any right to vote, but the right to self defense goes way back.

So you support "reasonable firearms restrictions" like those found in other countries.

re: firearm restrictions. Only for NON citizens and violent felons, and my viewpoint isn't from the perspective of: "they should not have a right to self protection". It's from the perspective of: we are the United States, if we go to war with ANY other country, we have tens or more lightly hundreds of thousands of foreign nationals within our borders, armed. That sounds like a dumb ass idea to me. I might add that watching 2 skyscrapers fall up close and personal 23 years ago made more AMERICA FIRST than most. YMMV

His aspect on why Americans are being targeted are true, my question how the illegal got a gun hasn't been answered.

You already mentioned other countries and they oppose their own citizens being armed which is very much inline with what the crowd in New York City vote for.

So...

How are police going to know if someone is a citizen and allowed to be armed?

How will a citizen have to prove it?

What arms do you want prohibited for non le US citizens?

Where do you want non le US citizens prohibited from possessing arms?


And a really good question, how was this guy armed prior to the ruling?

I agree, Joel. But it's almost like that's a rhetorical question these days, or in jest.

It's not in jest, we know why Americans are targeted. This guy broke the law by being in this country and obtained a firearm. How? Why wasn't that in question?

Alot of questions on the double standards in this

I understand you didn't propose the question in jest. I'm saying that is how it is often viewed or interpreted.

And, I agree. Why wasn't the fact that the guy was in the country illegally to begin with questioned and how did he source the weapon???!!!

Things are fixing to get rowdy in this country. Everybody is going to need guns and lots of ammo and a strong will to hold on to your weapons.

Some of the border crossers are ending up in urban environments where tensions are already ramping up due to the vanguard of Hispanics already there and now their numbers are being augmented by new arrivals putting the squeeze on the black ghettos. Blacks already don't much like having been pushed out of second place by Latin Americans so that could easily get more violent.

Those of us out in rural areas could be targeted for home invasions and auto theft by newly arrived dreamers. I could see 8 or 10 dreamers doing recon an picking out a relatively isolated house to pillage.

If 2020 is any gauge we will soon have the Democratic shock troops rioting and looting which could easily degenerate into a complete breakdown of civil order.

In a quick search, I didn't find any free record that might say how he got the pistol. All possibilities I saw said "Buy from Pacer."

I did find the pistol description.

HERIBERTO CARBAJAL-FLORE S,
defendant herein, knowing that he was an alien illegally and unlawfully in the United
States, did knowingly possess, in and affecting interstate and foreign commerce, a
firearm, namely, a loaded Raven Arms MP-25 .25 caliber semi-automatic pistol
bearing serial number 649179, which firearm had travelled in interstate commerce
prior to defendant's possession of the firearm;
In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 922(g)(5)(A).

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ilnd.389849/gov.uscourts.ilnd.389849.1.0.pdf

Bruce

Had friends that moved there in the 70's.

Didn't make it more than a couple of years. Missed home as I recall.

"Interstate commerce" is how they claim control of everything. They say that virtually EVERYTHING "affects interstate commerce", therefore, they have the power to regulate it.

Was the man in question a convicted felon?

Was the gun stolen? As some want to claim?

It would be real nice if they would overturn the bull schitt denial of rights after a misdemeanor conviction of domestic violence.

Not that I have any use for men who smack women or kids around. They are the lowest of lowlife. Slightly above pedophiles. But still, it is a misdemeanor.

And a clarification on my opinion of illegal aliens: They SHOULD be kept out. And any who slip through the cracks SHOULD be put out.

Exactly.

I do think many of those stating agitation about this court decision have less concern about illegal aliens than they do about the 2A as a recognized right.

My stance is that the only rights that someone sneaking in (or boldly coming) into this country has, in violation of the law, is to be exported as quickly as possible. Instead of being put in prison or possibly executed. miles

They seem to have more rights than citizens lately, so deportation won't happen

You right they do seem to have more rights than citizens, the majority of them are here to stay and more on the way.

Has anything been mentioned that 2A rights aren't recognized for US citizens?

That has historically been the case with less agitation than this case has produced.

It is always brought up that this is considered a God Given Right, and the Bill Of Rights just confirms it. If this be true, then this right is world wide, and they can celebrate it in their home country. It is also brought up a lot, by people, that by their own admission, don't believe in God. Same people that always want Sunday and Christmas off from work. miles

Maine's Constitution states:

"Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned."

This pre-dates any fedral gun laws as it was approved by Congress in 1820. To my mind this maintains the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States' relenquishment of power to the State, and nullifies any State law abhorrent to the Maine Constitution.

I am a firm believer anyone who is let out of prison should have all their rights restored. If they are too dangerous to have a gun in there hand after serving a sentence, why did you let them out?

In theory, I agree with you but in reality how many return to the system ? Our court and corrections system is a joke.

So because other countries dislike rights(including the right to arm one's self) you want yourself and others to not have rights within the USA?

Why should their crime be used as an excuse to deny you the right to arm yourself?

I feel the same it makes no sense to me that a person at 18-20 years old makes a bad choice gets a felony conviction and gets a life sentence on his 2A rights. That needs to be overturned it really does.

[quote]Why should their crime be used as an excuse to deny you the right to arm yourself?/quote]

Because you are a criminal. I do believe that there should be a simple path to getting rights restored. miles

It’s called Battlefield Pick Up ..

I believe Eric Holder and the Black Jesus have Distribution Centers around the Country ..

This is what happens if the Law isn’t Enforced against these Types ..

Hey who was the Secretary of State at the Time when the Two Homme Boyz we’re running guns into Mexico

“ Hillary Your Going to Jail “

Hilarious got the Sharpest Skates in the Capades

[quote][So because other countries dislike rights(including the right to arm one's self) you want yourself and others to not have rights within the USA?
quote]

Not anything close to what I said. When you enter this country Illegally , You are a criminal. You forfeit your rights because you choose to not obey the law. Laws are to protect the citizens and guests of the United States, not criminals. You and others that want to bastardize the law are an abomination. miles

1) to be crystal clear, I am not a criminal

2) my question was

Why should their crime be used as an excuse to deny you the right to arm yourself?

And denying/infringing your right has to be a part of it.

If the person that got convicted in 1999 is out of prison they look like you and come and go from the same places you do so you keep having to prove to .gov that you are ok to be armed with that plan. Why let .gov have a say in that? There is the infringed part that should make it verboten along with .gov frequently arming inept to downright bad people and annoints them with special priveleges that greatly exceed rights.

So anyone accused of a crime loses all their rights? Actually i nailed what you said. Screw that.

So why were illegal aliens under Ronald Reagan ok?

Running guns in to Mexico, like free cell phones, started during the Bush II administration.

Hillary Clinton getting tossed in prison was a Trump campaign promise that was never(even slightly) tried.

Some of you guys sound like you have felon family members, or you are a felon. Hey, no big deal. Washes off. Just like Darien Gap mud.

Can a wetback own a car, or a knife, or a baseball bat? How about a can of gasoline? How about a pound of fentanyl? All of those things can be just as deadly as a gun, and probably more so. Getting one's man panties in a wad because some jerk with face tatoos and a rap sheet as long as his arm is in possession of a gun sounds like the logic lieberals want to use against us- - - - -"If he didn't have a gun he wouldn't be able to commit crimes!" Bull cookies! Catch the scumbag in the act of committing a crime, and shoot him- - - - -problem solved, permanently!

Since that pissed you off, here are more details on the illegal alien amnesty, atf operations, and free cell phones you support.


https://www.boundless.com/blog/reagan/

https://www.wftv.com/news/local/9-investigates-abuse-free-cellphone-program-lifeli/107318289/

https://www.kold.com/story/21478828/special-investigation-operation-wide-receiver/

So are you saying to arm the illegals and just shoot them when they do something? Let's just shoot them when they cross the border

The people acting upset don't like full US citizens with no criminal record being armed either.

He didn't say anything about arming them.

You aren't illiterate or stupid so that narrows it down to dishonesty.

Who's being dishonest? Who here would not want a citizen with no record armed? Or atleast have the capability to be armed.

The government maybe?

The left?

People upset over this ruling are upset because it recognizes the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment states shall not be infringed, not that the gov gets to set various stipulations

So your saying our bill of rights is for anyone in the world especially if they illegally step 1 foot in this country? In your opinion of course. I'll never agree with it.

And anyone who says "I support the 2A, but.


"

Dude, tweak a nerve? Laughing.

I guess one good thing is we can get rid of the 4473 form and all background checks. No way feds can run a check on an illegal.

Or are we back to the tiered system. American bad, illegal good

The BOR is basically affirming basic human rights that apply to all humans. The BOR forbids the government from trampling on those rights and #9 acknowledges that the BOR does not cover all the basic human rights and clearly states that the listed rights "shall not be construed to deny or disparage others (rights) retained by the people".

We are not yet to a point where you have to carry your citizenship papers for Gestapo inspection and I hope we can observe basic human rights.

I am not at all pleased that the country is being overrun with 3rd world savages but it isn't such a bad thing that courts are recognizing the right of "the people" to be armed with firearms.

The tone of this discussion leads me to believe there just might be sentiment building in some unlikely quarters for the rewriting of the 2nd amendment restricting it and all other rights to citizens in "good standing". Think about where that might lead.

Then congress could define citizen in "good standing".

I'd be happy to have it rewritten to say " citizens" vs persons.

I wasn't the one falsely accusing you or your family members of being criminals and all because I pointed out how similar politicians you claim to oppose are to the politicians you support.

So you support the 2A, but....

So our BOR's covers the world? Tell me how an illegal can get a firearm with a 4473? They don't have Ss #'s ( otherwise they would be legal). since most countries don't cooperate with us, running the name, if it's real doesn't mean squat.

How can they get firearms legally?

I'm very pro 2A....for citizens. How many unknown illegals do we have in this country now? I'm sure you would love to arm every single one of them. I don't, until we know who they are. I gotta prove who I am to buy a gun, they should too

Look at Strop10 post count. He is a government Plant here to stir up schit. miles

Or just a dam liberal

And then .gov would invent a way ta declare you not a "citizen", and take everthing ya have, with no due process.

They already are

Then there's no point in a rewrite.

The Amish acquire firearms. They hunt deer with manually operated rifles. They don't participate in social security. They don't have picture ID's.

Guns are traded or sold intra family and friends or gifted to minors.

I keep hearing about the gun show loophole.

No one in this discussion is advocating arming illegal aliens so repeating it over and over won't make it anything other than a lie.

So you support background checks and proving yourself worthy to folks like Merrick Garland and others.

Taking .gov out of the firearms approval business is just what the .gov has been wanting since....uhh.....never.

.

Since when do you get to say who I support? It certainly isn't who you think it is.

I was kinda thinkin the same thing.

Or maybe he's just the typical Lolbertarian, who is immediately offended at everything and feels the need to endlessly interject "but muh rights!"

Don't know why I'm feeding you....

You support illegals and their right to own a gun. I don't.

I hate background checks on firearms but it is what it is

There has to be some reason you resorted to baseless personal attacks when I pointed out Reagan let in illegals and Bush II sent guns in to Mexico along with handing out subsidized cell phones.

No I don't support illegals.

I am for getting .gov out of the firearms business and you apparently don't like that idea.

And we have another one opposed to 2A rights.

Rewording the Bill of Rights to say citizens would be a disaster. A congress with just a few more idiots than we now have could legislate the definition of citizen and a president controlled by the present ruling junta would sign it and a despot like Merrick Garland would enforce it.

I got an idea. Why don't you open a gun shop and start arming illegals with federal money?

At the time of the Founders, were full rights extended to the Indians? To slaves? To blacks? No?

Hmm. Perhaps they didn't believe in protecting Liberty for absolutely everyone after all.

I have no interest in arming illegal aliens and they should be deported.

What were you and several others hoping for with a conviction besides erosion of the 2A, .gov doing something it shouldn't, and putting him up in a prison on the tax payers' dime?

Not to slaves. Now we are getting down to why you oppose the 2A as a right.

ooooh....

Going by some writings I've seen, they didn't believe women or non owners of property had certain rights either.

The operative word there is "certain".

Did they intend for the God given rights to be conferred to all humans?

As I read through the Bill of Rights I keep coming across words such as ''the people'', ''no person'' ''nor shall any person'', ''the accused'' and so on. True enough our founders left slavery and Indians basically unmentioned but was probably on purpose to leave it for another day and in their own good time those issues were put under the protection of the BOR.

The word citizen isn't mentioned in the amendments until the 11th amendment and then it didn't pertain to U.S. citizens. U.S. citizens aren't mentioned or defined in the amendments until the 14th amendment in 1868.

The BOR needs to be interpreted as literally and liberally as possible. We need to be glad there is a court decision upholding the rights of a person to carry a firearm on their person and still believe that in the next breath the judge should have said to the police to escort that person to the nearest deportation facility and get him out of here.