SCOTUS issues order to drop mag bans, assault weapons bans, and carry bans!
(media.greatawakening.win)
Comments (171)
sorted by:
Washington had a mag bag going into effect tomorrow. So gov. INSLEE can eat a jumbo bag of dicks.
He "can walk backwards through a field of Dicks" (run the jewels - i think)
is that sort of like a moonwalk through the field of skins??
reminds me of a joke my stepdad tells...
We used to joke about Dick's Drive-In when I lived in Seattle. "Eat a bag of Dicks!"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick's_Drive-In
Governor? You have to get elected to be governor of WA. Inslee waa never elected.
MUH BUMPSTOCK Shills nowhere in sight!
The fuck is a bumpstock😅
Serious question?
Negative, sir. Tongue in cheek.
Give him what he give citizens in the state. A barrel full of maggoty apples.
Yeah, yeah, yeah! He's a Maggot Man!
https://www.wethegoverned.com/maggot-man-washington-state-governor-inslee-earns-new-nickname/
Can he fit more in there?
I mean, Im sure he'll try.
All gun laws are unconstitutional.
There are only 5 good gun laws; Treat all firearms as if they are loaded. Always keep your firearm pointed in a safe direction. Finger off the trigger until ready to fire. Be certain of your target, line of fire, and what lies beyond it. Always wear appropriate eye and ear protection.
Perfect list. I also like this one from my old man…
“We can either drink beer or we can shoot guns. But we ain’t drinking and shooting.”
Never was an issue until all my drunk family members started showing up to range day. 🤦
Alcohol and ammunition always make for interesting days at the range.
We might be related...
Ya'll might be REDNECKS if both are present...
Jeff Foxworthy!!!!!!!!
I've got my sign...
The blue collar comedy tour rocked.
hey there's a government agency that deals with those very things and more, must make for some interesting departmental outings.
Even with those 5 you could eliminate the ear protection if you are deaf.
As for real laws - there are WAY too many. There are always exceptions to the rule but laws are either written in stone or written incorrectly. Exceptions be damned.
False. Deaf people can still get tinnitus.
Ear protection is no joke. Double up on it every time you shoot. A single unprotected shot - even from .22 - is permanent irreversible hearing loss/damage.
A single unprotected shot?
Did everyone who fought before ear protection was standardized lose the ability to properly hear?
I don't know, that seems too little but I'm not about to go out and shoot unprotected shots with a hearing test between them I guess
Yes, very much so. Sound is measured in decibels - which is on a logarithmic scale. Immediate hearing damage starts at around 120-130 dB of sound pressure. This varies slightly from person to person, but even a .22 is about 125-130 dB in volume.
Sound is wack so to just give a high level overview - Sound energy doubles every 3 dB, and sound pressure doubles every 6 dB. In other words, you don't want to fuck with it. Gunfire is LOUD.
The guy who invented the suppressor did so because he went completely deaf from shooting too much. Double up on all shooting environments.
It's just surprising; you would think that anyone who had experienced war ended up going deaf.
I guess on the plus side no Islamist terrorist fighting in their caves has any ear protection and that's one place where firing a gun would definitely suck with no protection
I don't know if you know this, but you can take damage in your ears even if you are deaf and it's not damage you want to take just because you've already lost your hearing.
And, an additional point, most frequencies can't be heard by our ears, especially as we age.
But just because we cannot hear those frequencies doesn't mean that a high decibel frequency we can't hear isn't doing damage.
You're right - I did not know that. I should've at least known the ear drums could burst. I don't know enough of the anatomy of the inner ear to know what other damage can be done to someone that can't hear, but there probably is something that can cause pain. Good call.
Your first four are better summarized in three:
The 3 rule standard is better/simpler than the 4 rule standard.
Will adopt.
A really good one is to know what's behind and around the intended target to prevent damage or injury to another person or yourself. I recommend you teach them marksmanship principles. Maybe take them out to training days. It's funny how the UK laughs at America's "crazy" gun laws yet it lets 12 year olds shoot with the MOD. Hypocrisy that doesn't need to be there
This is entirely covered in, "direction of least consequence."
A direction of least consequence isn't necessarily practical
In what possible way is maintaining the best possible orientation of a firearm not practical?
No no no. What I'm saying is it may not be practical to point it in a place that is less consequential because the consequences can vary so drastically in one's mind. Imagine teaching a kid to point it in a place with the least consequences, you leave it up to their own interpretation of what that means. Saying, "don't flag your buddies and civilians, and only point it at a direct threat to your life" would be better. Because it is more direct and leaves the only possible option in a manner of self defence. Making it more practical for those who are mentally inadequate of interpretation
Teach your children these. Have them memorize them. Then they will know what to do if they find one or their friends bring one out to show off with.
You don't need eye protection unless your weapon ejects casings the wrong way or, is experimental
I used to work with munitions and high pressure systems. Your remark is laughable. It amounts to "you don't need eye protection...unless you do." You don't need a seat belt, either, unless you collide with something. You don't need a life vest, unless you are thrown into the water. When you are operating something that involves pressures on the order of tens of thousands of psi, you use eye protection.
It's not needed. Firearms are not going to blow your eyes off. Imagine you're carrying and a criminal pulls out his weapon. "hold up criminal, let me put on some safety specs". If you want that extra safety when training then fair days. But the likeliness that your eyes will be significantly damaged is lower than being involved in a plane crash.
Look. Be reasonable. The eye and ear protection applies to training and practice. It does not apply to carrying and emergent use. In fact, firearms can blow your eyes off. There are accidents where the slide breaks the frame and comes off the end toward the face. Double rounds have loaded and blown the weapon apart. Rare? Yes. Ammo will eject back into your face. (You sound like someone who knows nothing about serious firearm accidents.) But who wants to gamble when it is possible to wear protection for---training and practice.
It's not just rare though. It's extremely rare. Fair enough if you are using surplus ammunition and an unreliable firearm. Even then it's still extremely rare. I know a guy that's mate shot a target pin and it ricocheted into his shoulder. Freak accidents happen. Do you wear big ballistic shoulder pads for shooting? No. You wear ear defenders as it is likely to damage your hearing as it is past the safe decibel range. I don't wear safety specs. At the end of the day, it's personal choice. That's why it's called, "PPE". PERSONAL protective equipment"...
It is interesting to me that you can make a distinction between "rare" and "extremely rare," without any metric to tell the difference, any basis for there being a difference, and any data to support the metric. Likewise, there is no way to predict a firearm will have a disassembly accident (i.e., you don't know a firearm is "unreliable" unless it demonstrates unreliability). Safety practice is a concentration on precluding adverse effects. What you are doing is indulging in the magical thinking of "it won't happen to me." For your sake, I hope not.
I would like a law preventing disarmament in any private business.
Problem is that defeats private land /property /ownership, which is also protected . Would you like it if just anyone went to your house and said I can carry this gun, knife, whatever on your property wether you want me to or not?
Businesses that are anti gun, just boycotted them. Tell them why, and how much you would have spent per month/year. Get others to do the same.
They will capitulate or fold.
If the government can't do something, but a private business can, what happens? The government will coerce private businesses to do it with the excuse, "Hey, it isn't us."
That's how they're taking away free speech on social media.
No. Even private businesses should have to respect human rights. Period. No excuses.
Not until the way businesses are recognized is changed, you don't understand how it works.
To state and fed govt, businesses are living entities. They have their own numbers (TINs instead of SSNs), a license (similar to birth certificate), and for all intents and purposes on paper a business is like a person, with most all rights and privileges.
How do you think a business can own land and assets? They can make their own rules on what happens with their stuff, and on their land? They can enter into agreements and contracts, just like people.
To state and federal govts, they are so similar, there is hardly any difference between the two (civil liberties and such, but for the purposes of this im glossing over). If you can regulate things on companies, you can regulate it on people. This is part of how the system is broken, but is a part all the same.
If you say you can force stuff on independent companies, there is a chance you can on individuals too. In many ways you can, but you do NOT want to continue to erode businesses rights. Same with people.
People can act like dicks, you have a right to. Doesn't mean you will have friends. Businesses can also be dicks, that is the owners right. Doesn't mean he'll be in business for long, or not suffer consumer wrath, maybe even lawsuits depending on how dickish. Examples: disney, Twitter, meta.
As soon as the govt can force a business to do something, you can also force them to make cakes for gay weddings. And supporting that, my fren, would make you a progressive liberal commie nut job.
But I think it's more that you just haven't thought it through.
Be at peace, and be excellent to each other.
I just think that it should be better resolved by preventing the government from making any such incentives, positive or negative, from privately owned businesses.
Only problem is, who holds the government accountable? Who enforces it? Which one takes the punishment?
Man, government is pretty shit.
There's an old saying that goes something like, "government is the worst way to protect rights, except for all the others."
Something like that, I can't remember exactly, lol.
A corporation can effectively live forever and can’t go to jail if they kill someone. The rules should be stricter for corporations.
Agreed, and the inherent rules need changed as well.
By making businesses more like people so they can operate in the world, people are de-humanized and treated more like business entities. Lifeless, soulless things. Not how it was supposed to be.
I complained to a car dealership, Sometime after I found it was gone. Tell them you don't like it and will boycott them and some may get rid of it.
I was once instructed that a "lifetime guarantee" for a product referred to the lifetime of the vendor, not the lifetime of the purchaser.
Private property rights
Hold up. Rocket launchers? Imagine if antifa could get rocket launchers. Maybe some are within a legitimate reason
If antifa could get rocket launchers, so could everybody else.
And who do you think would have better aim? trustfund babies who crank it to the communist manifesto, or rednecks who blow shit up for fun?
Fair point!
semi-relevant (you'll see...) for a good laugh at an insane and fucked up situation, check out dankula's video on the great nordic biker war...
https://www.bitchute.com/video/7s8B1ELAs6g/
Count dankula?
He's going by Justice Dankula these days, but yes.😎
"shall not be infringed"
If it infringes - by govt - it's unconstitutional.
The SC has been rocking lately
Hell yeah they have. Wondering if there was some sort of GO signal given
I think that was when they got a solid 5 or 6 principled justices on the bench. Ruling from law and precedent instead of feelings and urgent needs.
This past week has been the largest contraction of centralized power in the USA in my lifetime.
That is one seriously funny take.
No kidding. I am very pleasantly surprised!!
What all of these decisions should do is make people realize that if a 'law' is unconstitutional, then by definition, it's an illegal law. How many people go along with these lower court decisions and then later find they are overturned? Always look to the constitution, and don't let them take that precious document away.
Also, anyone trying to push those illegal laws should immediately be arrested and deposed from their positions.
That goes for every person who votes to violate the second amendment. What's that? Congress would grind to a halt because 90% of it would be taken away in cuffs?
What else is new
Very true. Most (all?) Government officials take an Oath to defend the Constitution. Acting against the Constitution is the clearest way to demonstrate one is not upholding their oath.
Everyone should have a copy.
Also look up jury nullification in a private browser, and pretend you've never heard of it if you ever get called to a jury...
This should eliminate carry permits as well and people owning fully automatic weapons should also be allowed.
Damn right, and get ATF off the backs of parts manufacturers. I want a forced reset trigger and can’t get one at the moment.
I'd Google that as I'm apparently too tired to fully grasp which direction that goes, but I'm pretty sure the AFT is watching me and waiting for me to hit enter on that search
They are. It's just that the transfer and ownership requirements are expensive and onerous.
Alabama eliminated the need for a conceal carry permit with the Constitutional Carry bill in March 2022, but it doesn't start until January 2023. Meanwhile I just got a notice yesterday saying I need to renew mine.
Alabama conceal carry law:
On March 10, 2022, Gov. Kay Ivey signed HB 272, or the constitutional carry bill, into law. Beginning on January 1, 2023, anyone who is 21 years old or older and legally permitted to carry a firearm will no longer be required to obtain a permit in order to carry a concealed pistol.
Permits are not required when buying a handgun. There is no firearms registration in Alabama. No background check is required when buying a handgun from a private individual. There is also no mandatory waiting period for handgun purchases or magazine-capacity restrictions.
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/basic-carry-laws-alabama/
Yes. Technically they sent the open cases back to the 9th circuit, with a clear message of cut this shit out.
States can still ban stuff tho right?
The Constitution is the Supreme law of the land. So no, they will try, but ultimately it's in violation every time they do.
States cannot take away constitutional rights. States can only create laws for items not explicitly in the US Constitution. The federal government only has power over the items explicitly in the US Constitution, all other rights are reserved for the States, or The People.
Thank you patriot.
What about cases outside the nutty 9th? I believe NJ had a case pending
There were three different cases they sent back to the lower courts. I believe NJ was one of them
Your guns are safe. Top kek!
I've been reminding myself that for the last year and half.
I’ll never get tired of the WINNING
boom
Oh happy day! This means that NY's SAFE act might be getting the boot soon!
Does this mean I can buy a Rare Breed FRT!?
That’s what I’m waiting on I’m gonna have my receiver laser etched to say SAFE/FIRE/ and OH SHIT. 😀
How about class three weapons.
I want a ma duce.
I just want a supressor.
Those are not hard to get or expensive in a red state. Legal one tax and everything less than a thousand.
A thousand dollars is not expensive?! What the hell do you do for living?
Aircraft mechanic,with lots of overtime.
Goto school for 18 months and you can be the same.
Well, aside from the cost by the manufacturer..which is also probably raised due to
regulationsinfringements by the government at the manufacturer level tooYou missed the point,nowhere did I even imply that the law is correct or just,or even legal. Lots of people don't know that suppressors are in fact legal and avaliable.
Passing on basic info,is just helping a fren.
A good AR is over a thousand and the right scope might cost you more than the gun. The upgrades will get you.
Then again, if you shoot regularly for practice, your ammo will eventually cost more than all of it.
Seems like with current government infringements and purchasing that the ammo might cost more than the gun before you even fire a round out of it!
Yea, a suppressor is an elaborate soda can. It should cost $20-$50.
But there shouldn’t be that restrictive tax and application. You should be able to just buy or make a suppressor and stick it on, no questions asked.
paying more than the price of a lot of guns for just a suppressor is kinda expensive mate :D
Yeah - get rid of the illegal infringement and we can make our own. The prices would come down quickly as well since suddenly the manufacturers could sell them by the 10s of thousands. People would buy multiple suppressors - one for each gun - if the prices fell enough.
Great point. 3D printers and CNC machines could run all day and night without the government restrictions. Once everyone that owns one of those starts making them, the prices would come down quickly.
Not compared to a full auto,I know lots of people with suppressors,and none with full auto
One possible consideration is that the natural acoustic resonance of the suppressor could be different from the cyclic rate of the weapon. This could lead to problems with operation, requiring a lower cyclic rate.
That's because it's incredibly hard to get licensed for one of those to begin with though
Not that hard in a free state for someone with no criminal record.
I still reject the normalcy of a 200$ tax on a can. Single income family. 200 is a lot.
Buy a solvent trap or a Maglite flashlight. Mag lite bodies are strong enough to be a reliable sound suppressor body. Baffles, spacers, and end caps can be bought relatively cheaply. And drilling the holes for caliber of choice can be done in 20 mintutes with a drill press or vice and cordless drill.
Oio filters too, but we shouldnt have to deal with this. Tis oppression.
I want an AA-12.
I would like an A-10 please, and enough land to build a runway.
Man, you guys think a lot bigger than me.
Well, to be fair I'd probably settle for an Apache and a rooftop helipad.
A man of the people! :D
Should be legal for home defense. Can't imagine any home intruders would be able to make it through the wall of lead that you could throw at them with one of those
Sweet...
Lock n Load...
fuggin based
Did I miss something? This was the US Supreme Court? I didn't see anything posted anywhere else about this. This is pretty HUGE.
Can I get some of those $Billions of weapons we are sending to Ukraine?
Just an anti-tank weapon and a few short range missiles would be fine.
WINNING
I don’t believe the SCOTUS has the authority, nor should it. But I would like to see the Executive and Legislative Branches agree on intra-state CCW recognition
Just as a marriage license, drivers license, or legal contract is recognized by every state; a CCW issued in one state should allow you to travel across the continental US without issue
CCW is unconstitutional. "Keep and bear" is already in the text.
Here is the caveat in "keep and bear"; say that you are openly wearing a holster with your weapon of choice. You are minding your own business, and somebody comes behind you, whacks you over the head with a bat - and now owns your $300-5,000 pistol.
My CCW means my weapons are hidden, because I merely witness someone attacking you; I remove the threat without warning, and return your property to you. When you openly carry, you are inviting attention - whether it's the first shot fired, to remove a known threat in a robbery, petty theft, or risk reduction.
I remain hidden in the crowd, lethal and armed. Just like the criminals are; except I had to go through some hassles up front. My weapons are legally registered, I paid for every dime of every ammo, training, certification and background check. I also understand that I will be persecuted for daring to protect my fellow innocent American citizen.
The point of carrying isn't to defend yourself. Because it is too easy for someone to get the drop on you.
The point is to defend those around you.
If criminals know that there are 2 people carrying, then they will have to take them both out simultaneously. If 5 are carrying, then they have to coordinate 5 at the same time.
Where is this? NAGR has nothing on their site about it.
It's on the supreme court website. All I have is a telegram link to the decision.
It was remanded back to the lower courts. Interestingly, I think the 9th circuit was flipped. https://www.nraila.org/articles/20220630/scotus-reverses-and-remands-two-nra-ila-backed-magazine-cases
Followed by the bans on full automatics, short barreled rifles, and short barreled shotguns. Hopefully.
I want a to legally be able to have a full auto Thompson type writer and I wish to purchase it from a sears catalog .
Imagine me typing out 30 booms
What about AMMO!? Wonder if this can help the cost of ammo and not letting the deepstate charge 1000% more a bullet.
Now do ATF
Getting as much progress in before the diversity hire mucks everything up.
Personally if I can reverse any gun law it'd be the full-auto ban of I think '86.
I dont see anything on the supreme courts site saying they did that https://www.supremecourt.gov/
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-orders-lower-courts-reconsider-gun-law-challenges-2022-06-30/
Sweet!!!!
So we can all go buy some SAWs, M-60s, MA-2s, M-16s, M-14s, SMAWs, etc?
Give me an M60 and several M18A1's and I'll be happy.
Sauce?
That’s weird I can never find the CA updated bullshit, just the undone laws I like. I’ll stay that way. It was not passed out like a memo, not my fault. Give me my AA12 and .50 cal. now thanks CA shit hole
Does the carry ban being overturned mean we don't need a CCW permit even in states that have it?