Court tosses California's concealed-w...

Court tosses California's concealed-weapons rules

There are 81 comments on the Sacramento Bee Newspaper story from Feb 13, 2014, titled Court tosses California's concealed-weapons rules. In it, Sacramento Bee Newspaper reports that:

A divided federal appeals court on Thursday struck down California concealed-weapons rules, saying they violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Sacramento Bee Newspaper.

Get Out

Jacksonville, NC

#75 Feb 17, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
BZZZZZZZZZZZZZT! Wrong answer! Wide Receiver begot F&F and was run by the same people. Did they learn their lesson? No they did not. Did Obama have anything to do with F&F while it was operating?
None whatsoever, outside of being the POTUS.
The difference in the two Gunrunners is during Wide Receiver the Mexican Government and Mexican ATF were briefed on the operation but dropped the ball when they lost track of the weapons crossing the border. During F&F no one informed the Mexican Government or Mexican ATF that F&F was going on, so no one was watching for the guns.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#76 Feb 17, 2014
Armed Veteran wrote:
If you want to blame the guy in the big chair for one operation, you can blame the OTHER guy in the big chair for the other.
Right.

Like you blame Bush for Operation Wide Receiver.

GOSH! Who keeps bringing up F&F?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#77 Feb 17, 2014
Get Out wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference in the two Gunrunners is during Wide Receiver
There was no difference between the two and both resulted in guns being lost.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#78 Feb 17, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no difference between the two and both resulted in guns being lost.
And NEITHER has ANYTHING to do with the FACT that:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed."

Does it, cowardly and treasonous drone?
Get Out

Jacksonville, NC

#79 Feb 17, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no difference between the two and both resulted in guns being lost.
The difference in the two Gunrunners is during Wide Receiver the Mexican Government and Mexican ATF were briefed on the operation but dropped the ball when they lost track of the weapons crossing the border. During F&F no one informed the Mexican Government or Mexican ATF that F&F was going on, so no one was watching for the guns.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#81 Feb 17, 2014
Get Out wrote:
<quoted text>
The difference in the two Gunrunners is during Wide Receiver the Mexican Government
There was no difference between the two and both resulted in guns being lost.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#82 Feb 17, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no difference between the two and both resulted in guns being lost.
And neither has ANYTHING to do with the FACT that:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed."
Get Out

Jacksonville, NC

#86 Feb 17, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no difference between the two and both resulted in guns being lost.
This is the same Government the anti-gun supporters want to ban or restrict legal weapons by circumventing the 2A. When the government breaks its own background check laws and then tries to blame the illegal guns crossing the border on lax background check practices, beware the government. That would be a very good example why the 2A was written to the Constitution and BOR.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#87 Feb 17, 2014
Get Out wrote:
<quoted text>
This is the same Government the anti-gun supporters want to ban or restrict legal weapons.
Do clog the forum up with rants, shug.

90 percent of Americans support universal background checks and the vast majority are themselves gun owners.

I understand your felony friends don't like it.
Thug

Saltillo, MS

#88 Feb 18, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do clog the forum up with rants, shug.
90 percent of Americans support universal background checks and the vast majority are themselves gun owners.
I understand your felony friends don't like it.
And what if 99.9% of Americans (including blacks) supported the slavery of one innocent black man? Would simply being a majority make it ok to infringe on that one persons rights?
Thug

Saltillo, MS

#89 Feb 18, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do clog the forum up with rants, shug.
90 percent of Americans support universal background checks and the vast majority are themselves gun owners.
I understand your felony friends don't like it.
Can you show how a background check WILL or WILL NOT prove the future action or inaction of a person? If a person has lied before should their right to free speech be removed because they MAY lie again? If a person has never lied is that proof they will NEVER lie in the future?

Do criminals who have killed with a knife or rolling pin given a background check before being allowed to buy a knife or rolling pin again? How about a person who has killed with their bare hands? Do we remove their hands?

Do you ever really think about your stance on a subject before ranting about it or do you simply repeat what you heard from the media? Do you ever stay open minded about a subject or stick to your stance because you don't want to be proven wrong?

Hey I'm willing to be open minded and support your stance IF you provide me with a better more efficient means of defense than a gun. But how about you being open minded and admitting my owning a gun is no threat to you (unless you are a criminal). Or be open minded enough to admit background checks can not provide an absolute predictor of future behavior.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#91 Feb 18, 2014
Thug wrote:
<quoted text>And what if 99.9% of Americans (including blacks) supported the slavery of one innocent black man?
You don't get to claim anything you want to do and inflect on the rest of us as a right, dipstick.

It didn't work for Charles Manson and isn't gong to work for you.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#92 Feb 18, 2014
Thug wrote:
<quoted text>Can you show how a background check WILL or WILL NOT prove the future action or inaction of a person?
Can you show me how checking a teenager for ID will prevent him from going to the next store and trying again?

Stop checking ID's, I guess.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#93 Feb 18, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do clog the forum up with rants, shug.
90 percent of Americans support universal background checks and the vast majority are themselves gun owners.
I understand your felony friends don't like it.
Why do LIEberals LIE? 90% of Americans want no such thing, you cowardly and treasonous drone.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#94 Feb 18, 2014
Thugtard wrote:
<quoted text>
did you ever hear of pepper spray, tear gas or stun guns?the news may not have reached your part of the bayou...
examine how things work in japan...
But what about the country at the other end of the spectrum? What is the role of guns in Japan, the developed world's least firearm-filled nation and perhaps its strictest controller? In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year: 2006 saw an astounding two, and when that number jumped to 22 in 2007, it became a national scandal. By comparison, also in 2008, 587 Americans were killed just by guns that had discharged accidentally.
Hey treasonous coward, does Japan have the following?-

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed."

We The People of the United States DO.

Don't like it, coward?

Move to Japan.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#95 Feb 18, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't get to claim anything you want to do and inflect on the rest of us as a right, dipstick.
It didn't work for Charles Manson and isn't gong to work for you.
Sure We The People do, treasonous coward:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed."

Don't like it, traitor?

LEAVE.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#96 Feb 18, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you show me how checking a teenager for ID will prevent him from going to the next store and trying again?
Stop checking ID's, I guess.
Our government has NO delegated authority to interfere with the right to keep and bear arms PERIOD, traitor-troll. In FACT, our governments were EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN from doing ANY such thing:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed."

Don't like it, treasonous coward?

LEAVE.

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#98 Feb 18, 2014
inbredslovejesus wrote:
<quoted text>
so you don't want something that works... you just enjoy killing...bwhahahahahah...typi cal mental degenerate
infringed every day in california, new york and many...many states... you better get used to it... bwhahhahahahhahah.... MADAME PRESIDENT WILL EXPAND ON IT TOO... MWHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHA
Works? Hardly, cowardly troll. And only a demonrat LIEberal psychopath like you would enjoy killing.

As you can see by the article being commented on. Kalipornia isn't going to be infringing for very much longer, senseless troll. And Hitlery will not even be nominated, drooling spambot.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#99 Feb 18, 2014
2ndAmRight wrote:
LEAVE.
GET a JOB YOU WORTHLESS WELFARE COLLECTING GOVERNMENT CHECK PARASITE!

“shall NOT be infringed”

Since: Oct 13

Phoenix

#101 Feb 18, 2014
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
GET a JOB YOU WORTHLESS WELFARE COLLECTING GOVERNMENT CHECK PARASITE!
The ignorama-troll screeched to itself in the mirror.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Supreme Court Continues to Reschedule Concealed... Jun 21 Daniel stollings 2
News Mass shooters tend to be domestic abusers first Jun 20 Jagermann 2
News GOP House hopeful says more in Congress should ... Jun 16 Red Crosse 3
Former University Professor Suggests the NRA Is... Jun 15 FormerParatrooper 5
News 2nd Amendment: Good Enough for Kim Kardashian, ... Jun 13 Billyball 4
News Bristol Palin is engaged (May '15) Jun 3 Grecian Formula 19 75
News New Thermal Scope Offers Amazing Night Vision Jun 2 OwenJames 1
More from around the web