Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
TL;DR
Lawsuit in Maryland is arguing that firearms, by physical presence alone, constitute a form of intimidation, and so may violate the First Amendment in those spaces which serve a 1A purpose (museums as the main example here). Thus, exclusion of firearms from public spaces that serve a 1A purpose are legitimate, and the Supreme Court affirmed the 'sensitive places' laws (museums, courthouses, legislative assemblies, etc.) that this argument is trying to extend further.
RT: https://nicecrew.digital/objects/c3daa494-3d52-418a-8565-e902a2c510f3
-
Embed this notice
@dictatordave @Gundog @matty extremely stupid logic to try and get to guns.
If guns are intimidation, inherently, the least harmful resolution is concealed carry.
-
Embed this notice
@Gundog @matty lol, all that gun crime in museums in baltimore
i'd respect them a little if they'd just be honest about disarming whites
>muh republican governor tho
-
Embed this notice
@sickburnbro @Gundog @matty i dont think you can carry in any of those places to begin with, especially in a constitution free zone like maryland
but again, its not the guns that are the problems, its the negros of baltimore, the city that pelosi's gangster father ruined before shuffling out of there like a locust
-
Embed this notice
@dictatordave @Gundog @matty if you can't carry there to begin with, what justification did someone have to file the lawsuit? You can't ( or at least shouldn't ) file lawsuits without standing.
-
Embed this notice
@Gundog @matty >Implying the first amendment wasn't written before the second amendment
>Implying the founders and ratifiers of the bill of rights thought that guns were intimidation by their existence
>Implying said founders wouldn't have deported or worse the lawyer for arguing like a fag.
-
Embed this notice
@dictatordave @sickburnbro @matty That's partly it, Maryland passed a law last year and this litigation is claiming 2A and 14A (also some 1A with permission to carry in certain dwellings) violation by that law, so the impetus is a recent change.
*Edit, posted a Justia link to the case but it is not mentioned there, it's an amicus brief by the Brady Center. Link from the original video's description.
storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca4.176096/gov.uscourts.ca4.176096.41.0.pdf
-
Embed this notice
@sickburnbro @Gundog @matty i think the law suit is about brady and gifford, anti gun faggots, being allowed to warp bruen and say that scotus told them that 2a has to take a back seat to 1a so therefore you can't be armed because someone's feeling may be hurt and that's abridging their rights, but that's bullshit
either way, maryland has a black crime problem, that they've let fester, and disarming whites wont magically solve anything, and they know it
even crazier, these gun grabber groups like gifford and brady never see any consequences for professionally acting against the god given rights of the people, which is the other crux, they're still trying to litigate 2a to a lesser right and to be more of a privilege
-
Embed this notice
@Gundog @dictatordave @matty yeah, looks like they're trying to do the "but what about the children!"
sorry guys, people looking to commit crimes aren't going to care it is against the law to carry in a school. The only thing you can avoid by allowing carrying in a school is a person who wasn't looking to cause a problem but is carrying and suddenly chimps out in a school.
Such a person is probably known to be a disciplinary problem already.
Gundog
Bread up, Bro
dictatordave
BowserNoodle ☦️
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the