“We do own a gun.”
Amy Coney Barrett
Yeah well, so did DiFi before she could afford her own security. Barrett isn’t going to violate citizen’s rights under the Constitution. When, not if, she’s confirmed, neither will DiFi.
Barrett admits to owning a gun, says she can set aside beliefs to rule on 2nd Amendment fairly
The Supreme Court has largely avoided taking on major cases involving the Second Amendment since 2008
By Megan Henney
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett admitted during the second day of her confirmation hearing that her family owns a gun — but maintained that it would not hamper her ability to fairly decide a case on the Second Amendment.
“When it comes to your personal views about this topic, do you own a gun?” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham asked Barrett at the start of the hearing.
“We do own a gun,” she said.
Pressed by Graham whether she believed she could “fairly decide a case even though you own a gun,” Barrett responded: “Yes.”
“Judges can’t wake up one day and say I have an agenda, I like guns, I hate guns, I like abortion, I hate abortion and walk in like a royal queen and impose their will on the world,” she said. “You have to wait for cases and controversies, which is the language of the Consitution, to wind their way through the process.”
The Supreme Court has largely avoided taking on major cases involving the Second Amendment since 2008, when the nation’s highest court ruled that people have a right to keep handguns in their homes to defend themselves.
But gun control advocates worry that if Barrett wins Senate confirmation, tilting the Supreme Court 6-3 in favor of conservatives, the court’s approach to the Second Amendment could see a major shift. (During day one of the confirmation hearing, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., accused Barrett of having “radical” and “activist” views on the Second Amendment).
“If your views on the Second Amendment are adopted by the Supreme Court, it would imperil common-sense state laws like Connecticut’s all around the country,” Blumenthal said.
Da Nang Dick’s opinion isn’t worth a bucket of warm spit. The Dems have already lost, and they know it. Read the entire article here: Fox News
Did someone say “Barrett?”
Category: SCOTUS, Second Amendment
“…Da Nang Dick’s opinion isn’t worth a bucket of warm spit…”
More like Da Nang Dickless…
God ruined a perfectly good dildo when He put ears on Blumenthal’s head.
She will vote for power. She does 90% of the time in her ruling history.
Sides with government against the citizens.
Sides with large corporations against small business.
Sides with banks against homeowners, small businesses.
Sides with corporations against workers,
Sides with corporations against consumers.
That is her voting record. On these issues her decisions run more than 88% in favor of power.
And if she is like current Republican SCOTUS judges she will put donor and party interests over the interests of democracy itself.
Robert’s is not a Republican judge
In fact I don’t think he knows what he is
So what we are getting is a split court
With a swing vote that likes government
Providing for its citizens
Not really a split court
But it’s not a bad as it seems Lars
One way to win over conversions
Is to stop burning down cities
And being full of shit
Tell CNN to come back over to the center
And the tech companies to stop with
Shitting all over my rights
Remember they don’t give a shit about anyone but themselves
Are banks and corporations automatically wrong in every situation? Hack was under the mistaken impression that each of the litigants present their evidence in court, and upon being presented the evidence presented, the Judge makes a fair and just decision.
Hack was under the mistaken impression that each of the litigants present their evidence in court, and upon weighing the evidence presented, the Judge makes a fair and just decision.
Hack has to review before posting. He blames on the noxious fumes emanating from the Vice President of the company he works for creating a hazardous work environment.
Are you taking about lost points logistics ???
No, a proud but humble woman owned business formerly located in Bethesda MD.
Your leftwing boilerplate cant in opposition makes me like ACB even more.
She’s an originalist and textualist. She’ll decide things based on the law as it is written. Sounds like your issue is more with Congress and the President in that case who made the laws.
Things like McCain-Feingold were written and passed just so the politicians, who knew it was unconsitutional, could say “we did something”, hoping it would be found unconstitutional by the courts. That’s not the intent of the courts.
It is asinine to use gun rights as the primary measure of weather you are happy with a judge.
A 6-3 conservative court will be devastating to our republic.
If you are truly a moderate a 6-3 conservative court should scare you.
Gun rights is less than 1% of the issues they will be ruling on.
And they will consistently rule in favor of entrenching wealth, and power into the hands of the few and make corruption impossible to manage.
Babblebabblebabblebabble…
Just wait until they have to rule on things
related to the Obama/Hillary coup.
You will wish they stuck to guns instead.
You leftists say conservative, we who pay attention say she’s a Constitutional Originalist.. that is the actual reason you fear her, because she’ll likely rule according to the original intent and wording of the Constitution, not dream up new “rights” out of whole cloth, and push an agenda by legislating from the bench like your leftist heros have done for decades.
Go back to drinking your kool-aide
Well, if the composition of The Supreme Court does not please you and your comrades, perhaps you can assemble a team of commandos to kidnap them.
She is going to follow the Constitution as written.
You know, the one you swore to support and defend. She will take the same oath as you did, then take a second one.
The Left has this weird view of the SCOTUS as a super-legislature, re-writing things to make the laws “right” , and/or doing things not at all found in Law and Constitution.
She is going to keep her oaths, both of them, and -that- is why the Left hates her with. Burning Fury.
As written. Changed only by amendment. As intended to safeguard Liberty from those who twist, redefine, and outright ignore.
Again, why the Left hates her. Because she -will- keep her oaths.
Oath of a US Officer, other than President.
“I, ________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
Oath of a Supreme Court Justice
, _________, do solemnly swear or affirm that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as _________, according to the best of my abilities and understanding, agreeably to the constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God.”
And never forget, those who oppose / say we don’t need the Constitution / Bill of Rights are the reason they exist!
As to the leftist argument that some of the Founding Fathers were against the Bill of Rights, what they fail to realize is that the only reason those men opposed adding anything to the Constitution is that they felt the rights guaranteed in those 10 Amendments were so obvious and self-evident that there was no reason to write them down. They could not fathom the evil that is many of our current politicians who would infringe on the natural rights of the citizens of this Representative Republic.
But John Adams had it right:
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Which is why the left has spent decades working to destroy any moral foundation in this country, as well as ridiculing religion.
Don’t worry, Roberts is not a conservative.
“Whether,” Lars. Not “weather.” If you’re going to attempt to make a point, at least use correct grammar and spelling.
Kind of like your side uses abortion, no?
Except that the Second Amendment and firearm ownership are ACTUAL rights, not made up bullshit based on lies and faulty reasoning in the decision…
Will never understand how the right to privacy morphed into abortion, but it’s what we’ve got now thanks to the courts inventing things out of whole cloth.
What it will be devastating to is in being a check on the Will to Power of the Marxists and Neo-Communists you support. The ideas you represent belong in the trash heap of history right beside the Nazis.
Yeah-conservatives are the problem in this country!
/SARC
I wouldn’t trade my red-state home to live in any of the liberal utopias out there i.e. Chicago, Minneapolis, Baltimore, etc. how can the left claim to have the answers but the EVIDENCE is against their claims. Head in the sand perhaps?
Actually, support for the right to keep and bear arms is pretty good test for the support of Liberty and individual rights.
The “why” they support it is also a key indicator.
So, you’re saying that the huge influx of minorities buying firearms for their own protection since you left wing turd swallows decided that the cops should be disbanded.
I work at gun shows sometimes, the Ft Worth Gun Show had a huge number of minorities at it. Most were first time buyers and filled with questions about the use, care and feeding of said purchase…
Like all your cohorts in stupidity, you want those minorities to be defenseless in the face of mortal danger as your thug kinfolk burn down their homes, businesses and entire neighborhoods because they are stupid, bored white children of wealth and entitlement…..
In other words larsie-boi, go piss up a rope….
Folks with factory tinting who are armed and making themselves upwardly mobile do not need pale Marxist “liberators” and/or “organizers”.
What’s truly asinine is thinking a nominee to the highest court in the land shouldn’t be questioned on his or her opinions concerning our rights. It shouldn’t matter if cases concerning our rights only make up .25% of SCOTUS cases. IMO, those are the most important.
If we follow your idiotic “logic,” the Democrats shouldn’t be questioning Judge Coney-Barret on her abortion views.
No you socialist cuck, it will be anathema to socialist, undisciplined turd burglars such as yourself.
What it WILL be is a court that actually interprets the LAW, not legislating from the bench as another illegitimate arm of government, circumventing the other ones. The only fucked up rulings I saw came from the three leftist twats and that processional fuck up Roberts, who answered, incorrectly, a question never asked of the court regarding the unconstitutional Yomamacare act.
Now Steve, don’t call him a “cuck.” In order for a purported male to be a cuck, by definition, he needs a female partner for random dudes to bang with his consent or acquiescence. The Commissar does not have a female partner who does not require inflation and a patch kit.
Da Nang Dick spent most of his service time working for Toys for Tots.
He’s despised here in Connecticut, big time. How he gets reelected is anyone’s guess…
Typical dimwitted lying, thieving, scumbag Democrat.
“How he gets reelected is anyone’s guess…”
Buying and manufacturing votes of course, it’s the democrat way!
I bet Dickless here stole some of the most popular toys and sold them at a huge mark-up to orphanages…
Jane Fonda has more time in The Nam than Dickless Blummerthrall.
There is only one approach to the Second Amendment.
Says what means…means what it says. In plain English.
Don’t need the Supreme Court to figure that out.
They have more important work to do.
By rule fairly they do mean in a way so as not to infringe in any way on a citizen’s God given right to self defense, and the means by which to enforce it…right?
We need to stop with this, ‘defense of the second amendment’ shit. It isn’t negotiable. It isn’t even really an AMENDMENT. As one of the first ten it’s The Bill of Rights, and was called one by it’s being considered intransigent after most of the document had been hashed out if memory serves. Didn’t they go back at Madison’s behest and enshrine those ten as sacrosanct? It wasn’t intended to be pined over. It will go away when we voluntarily as a citizenry capitulate, and roll over to have our bellies rubbed.
Some years back when the D.C. ruling had Roberts speaking the slippery slimy words, “common sense gun laws,” I told my wife that we’d hear that phrase parroted ad infinitum, and that it’s definition would change like the weather we are supposed to be able to regulate by fiat.
We should not discuss common sense anything with imbeciles that have none.
These sons of bitches don’t even know which restroom they are supposed to use, and will ruin a child’s life from prepubescence with drugs NOT intended for them.
Hear, hear!!!
Actually “amendment” is essential.
The Second Amendment is not a separate constitutional article, self-contained and only self-referencing. It amends the whole of the Constitution. For example, it is -superior- to the Commerce Clause. The whole of the matter is “shall not be infringed” , not to even by saying “reasonable” “common sense” or “because!”. The treaty power can’t touch it, because the Second amended the treaty power.
Shall not be infringed.
This obsession the lefterds have with Others Who Have Guns is unhealthy, at its simplest. It appears that they all think they are going to be mowed down like green corn, when in fact, most of them are not worth the cost of a discharge from a BB gun, and no one really wants to go to the bother. It’s unfortunate that a bunch of numbnuts had to do Something Stupid last week, but there are plenty of stupid people in politics everywhere, so there is a balance there. Maybe the simplest thing to do is shut down Congress for a couple of years, make them stay home and kanoodle with their constituents about jobs that are gone, and stop wasting tax money on feeding their egos.
But, whatever tickles their fancy….!
I do have an 30 caliber air rifle that can take out a groundhog at 100 yards.
Yes, but a groundhog is a useful animal, Cowpill. You can make hamburgers out of it and turn the hide into a cute hat.
With politicians, you’d have to scrape the hide so thin that it will be useless for anything other than wrapping yesterday’s trash for disposal.
Thank you! I think that obsession is fueled by their absolute inability to comprehend that we are NOT as they are. They simply can not stop projecting.
They know bloody well what they’d do if they had all means of defense or offense in their scheming hands. We’ve seen it happen several times.
We just want to be left alone. Machiavelli is an interesting read if taken in the context of it’s time. We don’t look to it as a how-to-do manual. It doesn’t even occur to us to roll over others with no regard for their rights.
I’m afraid that this is never going to be gotten back in hand by voting. The other most peaceful way I can think of that might work would be if about one-twelfth of the U.S. population would familiarize themselves with the nuts and bolts of en masse jury nullification.
And I also think that it must’ve been a fine thing when Congress convened periodically, and had to travel great distances over inconvenient time lapses to meet.
Every time they threaten to shut down I mouth the words “please let it be!”
Machiavelli advised against disarming folks.
Point taken. I was referring more to the general statist method of maneuvering.
I have no beef with Nick. He was a very smart guy who knew that power was a game you didn’t play nice at.
Von Clauswitz was no piker either. We’d do well to heed them.
They are the best two I can think of that are most relative(my opinion only) to the western way of thinking. I am admittedly not an expert at palace intrigue. Too polite.
Man pull-eeze. These idiots act like the only 2 cases that will ever come up to SCOTUS is either about gunz and abortions.
There have never been any “common sense gunz control laws.” And the Constitution of these United States specifically states; “…..shall not be infringed.” Deal with it, you sons of bitches, you wouldn’t be trying to get rid of gunz if you weren’t planning on doing stuff that would make us want to shoot your grifting, career politicians ass for. The politicians that we have today are EGGSXACTLY WHY the Founders put that RIGHT into our Constitution. I had gunz…sigh…then there was the tragedy of the leaky boat crossing the quicksand filled flooded lake during the tornacane/hurrinado.
I’ll save my opinion on abortion when that subject pops up on a thread. Murdering babies deserves its’ own post.
The Left wants Roe vs Wade protected by Stare Decisis, but conveniently overlooks that Brown vs Board junked prior long-standing decision “separate but equal”.
They don’t -want- a Supreme Court and Constitution. They want a hard-left rubber stamp that doubles as a truncheon.
“You picked the wrong darn rec room!”
ACB
https://youtu.be/qFNBUs7O-h4
I’ll bet Amy owns a Mosin Nagant.
I see her as more of a 1911 girl.
Pair of M1911A1 (Singer made) consecutive serial numbers unfired, new in box.
Don’t tease me.
When did TAH become a porn site?
October 13, 2020 at 6:48 pm by the oraficial clock that logs comments.
I saw those on Ebay….
She being a constitutionalist judge of the originalist school, I see Judge Amy as more of a Winchester 1893 lever-action kind of gal, with a Colt SAA Peacemaker as her back-up…
You must mean an 1894 Winchester. There is no model 1893 Winchester lever rifle.
I had the 1893 Marlin lever action on my mind as well as the 1894 Winchester when I typed that in. Judge Amy probably has both in her armory…
I would be surprised if she or her husband owned more than one firearm. I have found that most career lawers own few or no guns.
Surprised when she said that they did no try to have her arrested.
I like her better than the privileged little prep-school allegedly rapey frat boy Kavanuagh.
That shitbag has no business on the highest court in the land.
In other words, he is highly qualified and is likely to support the Constitution against those who would destroy it or render it moot.
Even as characature, you are inept.
Awww, show us on the male doll where the evil Kavanaugh hurt you, dipshit.
Meanwhile, Elena Kagan sits on SCOTUS, although she never knew how to put on a judge’s robe prior to her affirmative action appointment.
And don’t forget Sotomayoooooorrrrrr, another totally unqualified obama appointee… If the repubs had followed the same rules as the dims, neither of those women would be justices, as both lied repeatedly during their hearings…
“Allegedly-rapey” according to an equally-privileged woman with a history of dishonesty, a story that changed daily, and was denied by every supposed witness. And again by an even-less-credible second accuser who was found to be lying her ass off. I could make a stronger case that you are guilty of treason and terrorism. Luckily for you, Lars, the legal standard for guilt is a bit higher than that.
Don’t forget how she was coached for days by her obamunista lawers. She must have practiced that squeaky little girl voice for weeks.
Commissar aka lars aka Major Moonbat, I wish my Ex-Wife upon you.
😂😀🤣😜😃😁
I will see your wish and raise it to add my ex-wife. Even as misguidedly liberal as she is, she’d eat his soul.
I will see both your ex’s and up the ante with my ex AND ex-MIL. My ex won’t just devour his soul, she’ll probably devour him after her psychotic mother drives him insane. I normally don’t wish the gruesome twosome on anyone, but in Lars’s case I think he deserves it.
Hi Dummissar,
You really are a vile, contemptible excuse for a human being, aren’t you?
You cling to lies and stories you know to be false–all in the hope of someday finding that perfect welfare state for yourself.
In the past, there was room for interpretation concerning your lap dog mentality to the Maoist far left.
But recently, you really have proven your bona fides as a clown and pawn.
I’m willing to be that as a leftie, you think nothing of drugging and raping women and fully support it for YOUR side. After all, comrades exist to be exploited, eh comrade?
There is nothing you seem to know that isn’t an outright lie or propaganda. That seemed weird to me until I read it all at once.
You are surprisingly and consistently for Chinese policy goals and against American policy goals. In fact, it is valid to say that you sound like a foreign agent.
Tune in next time for Dummissar gets REKT…
“I like beer!”
White privilege
Some snowflakes have already claimed that Beer is “racist” and it’s NOT just for Breakfast anymore!
Thunderbird knows no racism.
What’s the price? Two bits twice.
What’s the reason????
MD 20/20, Blotter report in a bottle.
But, but I saw that video where Liawatha says, “I think I am gonna get me a beer.” And then she drinks it outa the bottle. So, is Liawatha racist? Asking for one of the Commissar’s Antifa or BLM buddies.
Wrong again, turd burglar. And the bitch who committed fraud and perjury in accusing him belongs in prison.
One thing you can say for D-rats, they have perfected subornation of perjury like it is a political basic skill, especially when comes to Congressional hearings.
Looks like they are teeing up another one of those on ACB. Note that out-of-place “have you ever…” crap.
Maybe they can bring back little squeaky-voiced Balsey-Ford to claim that it was really Judge Barrett who tried to jump her bones in that high school drinking party of four. After all, she got away with massive perjury and fraud last time without any legal consequences.
Innocent until proven guilty.
The accusers were proven liars,
he was proven innocent.
Yet you still insist (who are you kidding, you don’t allege anything, you think he’s a rapist for no goddamn reason other than you don’t like what he stands for) he is a rapist.
You’re a pig, Lars. You can straight up go fuck yourself.
Just one more thing I don’t really need to know about her or any other citizen. Add it to the list of things I don’t care about, like how much they pay in taxes, who they slept with last night (or 20 years ago), their blood type, or their genetic origins.
Will never understand why so many private details about any of us are demanded be made public. It is usually irrelevant.
Guess someone should have told old dead Ginsburg that she was not a queen who could rule from the bench. She sure tried to do so.
I so love watching the left and the feminazis try to portray saint Ginsburg as some kind of godlike creature of infinite knowledge who single handedly advanced the womyn’s crusade to its modern crescendo of success. She had nothing to do with it. She is just a dead leftist who failed to perform her duties as they should have been performed.
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser” Socrates
ACB Gives Me A Judicial Boner (or is it ” judicious”?)