Red Flag Law- Extreme Risk Protective Order

domer76 said:
The grand jury indicts, dumbfuck. You know. The process that puts people in prison? :rofl2:
Click to expand...

and thank you for proving you also don't know how the fucking trial process works, dumbass ROFL

FYI, an indictment is not a conviction or prison sentence...................since you obviously don't know shit.

your stupidity, priceless
 
First I can find nothing that says a person facing a red flag hearing is not notified to present their side. If there is then link to it.

Temporary means temporary
 
SmarterthanYou said:
since you're in to exact words, what does 'shall not be infringed' mean??????

checkmate, cumbucket
Click to expand...

:lolup:

Got your ass kicked and now you divert. Typical.

Heller, dumbfuck. Read Heller and your hero, Scalia. You get “infringed” every day. And it’s constitutional. :rofl2:
 
SmarterthanYou said:
and thank you for proving you also don't know how the fucking trial process works, dumbass ROFL

FYI, an indictment is not a conviction or prison sentence...................since you obviously don't know shit.

your stupidity, priceless
Click to expand...

A hearing isn’t either, dumbfuck. :rofl2:
 
SmarterthanYou said:
citations are not the spoken words, obviously, but there are voluminous copies of all of those items I mentioned that specifically have citations...........are they not good enough for you to use? and don't bother with the common sense argument, you don't know what it is.


there's no rewriting history at all. there have been dozens of citations providing you hateful anti gunners and communists with proof that the 2nd Amendment prevents the feds from touching our firearms.............go read them


there is no such right, despite your racist attempts to come up with one.
Click to expand...

Citations ass- Dumb Ass! Fuck you and your Citations!
 
domer76 said:
“the Supreme Court has found that temporary DUI checkpoint stops (without reasonable suspicion) do not violate the Fourth Amendment rights of drivers. Basically, the Court said the importance of keeping impaired drivers off the road generally outweighs the inconvenience and intrusion to motorists. (Michigan Dep't of State Police v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444 (1990).)”

Checkmate, stupid fuck. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court does not have authority to change or interpret the Constitution.
 
domer76 said:
:lolup:

Got your ass kicked and now you divert. Typical.

Heller, dumbfuck. Read Heller and your hero, Scalia. You get “infringed” every day. And it’s constitutional. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

this is my last post to you, only so much stupid from you i can handle.......i've read heller, many times. from day one i said he fucked that decision........and yes, infringements are unconstitutional. that you can't understand that is your issue. but you hate the constitution, so its not that surprising.

try to remember at least this little part here........Scalia was not my hero. he was a pro big government tyrant who labored to pretend he was interpreting a constitution, not rebuilding a new one.
 
Adolf_Twitler said:
No dude, I can't wake the dead any more than you can. But, I am capable of using common sense- something you should learn to do as well!

But just because we cannot ask our forefathers, does not mean that I am going to let you Bat-shit-crazy Gun-Toting Conspiracy Terrorists rewrite American history to justify your Insane fetish for guns and ideas of overthrowing our own government and shooting innocent people you don't like at the Walmart stores!

You people are a problem- and our country is being assaulted by you Gun-Toting idiots that think the 2nd Amendment gives you maniacs some imagined right to turn your guns on and carry out your murderous assaults on people you racists don't like!
Click to expand...

The 2nd amendment does not give license to murder, dumbass.
 
domer76 said:
6-3 decision, stupid cunt. DUI checkpoints DO NOT violate the 4th. You can look it up on numerous sources, you fucking idiot.

“In sum, the balance of the State's interest in preventing drunken driving, the extent to which this system can reasonably be said to advance that interest, and the degree of intrusion upon individual motorists who are briefly stopped, weighs in favor of the state program. We therefore hold that it is consistent with the Fourth Amendment.The judgment of the Michigan Court of Appeals is accordingly reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.”

CHECKMATE, cunt. :rofl2:
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court does not have authority to change or interpret the Constitution. Neither does any police force.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
this is my last post to you, only so much stupid from you i can handle.......i've read heller, many times. from day one i said he fucked that decision........and yes, infringements are unconstitutional. that you can't understand that is your issue. but you hate the constitution, so its not that surprising.

try to remember at least this little part here........Scalia was not my hero. he was a pro big government tyrant who labored to pretend he was interpreting a constitution, not rebuilding a new one.
Click to expand...

Sure as shit not unconstitutional, delusional moron. SCOTUS rules, whether you like it or not.

Another checkmate, fool. :rofl2:
 
Into the Night said:
The 2nd amendment does not give license to murder, dumbass.
Click to expand...

Can you tell that to these idiots who load up and attack people they don't like!

Because they think the 2nd Amendment gives them the right- Just ask that idiot that shot up the Walmart! That is what he is telling the authorities!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top