D.C. chief: 'We will arrest armed protesters'

May 11, 2013 Full story: Examiner.com 637

Armed protesters who plan to march across the Arlington Memorial Bridge into Washington, D.C. on July 4 will have a special greeting committee awaiting them on the other side.

Full Story

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#63 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>I am a 17 year member of the us military, having served in multiple foreign wars. I am guessing you are not.... TRAITOR
Why do you hate freedom so much that you think anyone with a differing opinion is a traitor? DO you really hate freedom so much that you believe EVERYONE should share your beliefs? COWARD
You can poy and paste all the nutter blog drivel you want. The FACTS are that you are a nutter on the internet who possesses no more than a high school diploma.....while the USSC are highly educated in the area of Constitutional law.
I think i will trust the supreme court on this one billy-bob
No, sounds more like you are a government boot-licking treasonous coward. One that, if you did in FACT serve in the military. Is OPENLY calling out for the very Constitution that you [supposedly] took a solemn oath to "UPHOLD and DEFEND".

Here's a Supreme Court Ruling for you, TRAITOR:

"More especially, it cannot be believed that the large slaveholding States regarded them as included in the word citizens, or would have consented to a Constitution which might compel them to receive them in that character from another State. For if they were so received, and entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which they considered to be necessary for their own safety. It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went."--Mr. Chief Justice TANEY, U.S. Supreme Court, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856).

What has changed in our Constitution since 1856, traitor? That's right, NOTHING as far as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms goes.

Take a hike, you treasonous pos.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#64 May 12, 2013
mike wrote:
<quoted text>Your awfully tough sitting behind that computer and calling me a traitor-yeah ive seen guys who wear skirts claiming there a man.TRAITOR yeah that's a scream since ive served a chunk of my life in the military while you have hardly served a day because ive got you pegged.DEMOCRACY yeah you don't know what it is rather shoot first shoot some more than ask a question..
You are judged by the words of your own mouth, traitor. And I can assure you that I'm more than able to back up my words. Come to Phoenix, AZ. if you think you have me "pegged", traitor.

Oh, and traitor, we are a Constitutional Republic - NOT a 'democracy.

Since: Aug 10

United States

#65 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, sounds more like you are a government boot-licking treasonous coward. One that, if you did in FACT serve in the military. Is OPENLY calling out for the very Constitution that you [supposedly] took a solemn oath to "UPHOLD and DEFEND".
Here's a Supreme Court Ruling for you, TRAITOR:
"More especially, it cannot be believed that the large slaveholding States regarded them as included in the word citizens, or would have consented to a Constitution which might compel them to receive them in that character from another State. For if they were so received, and entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which they considered to be necessary for their own safety. It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went."--Mr. Chief Justice TANEY, U.S. Supreme Court, Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1856).
What has changed in our Constitution since 1856, traitor? That's right, NOTHING as far as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms goes.
Take a hike, you treasonous pos.
Awwwe. Pooor wittle guy. Youre such a pansy!
"Wahhh wahhhh nbow take a hike wahhhh"
All your pasting from nutter blogs only proved youre a mindless troll.
Why do you hate freedom? COWARD

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#66 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>The decision was just 4 years ago. THE USSC deemed it the constitutional law of the land.
“The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”--Joseph Story, >>>>>>> >>>U.S. Supreme Court Justice<<<<< <<<<< and Constitutional scholar,[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1833; Book III at 746,§ 1890)]

Since: Aug 10

United States

#67 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
“The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”--Joseph Story, >>>>>>> >>>U.S. Supreme Court Justice<<<<< <<<<< and Constitutional scholar,[Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1833; Book III at 746,§ 1890)]
The militia of the constitution is now called the National Guard

Nutter playing fake soldier in the woods are completrely irrellevant! I figured you were a militia freak.....i bet mcveigh makes you proud huh?
Another

Santa Fe, NM

#68 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll bet that some of the Oath Keepers will be there.
The police and military need to wake up. They are ALL U.S. citizens underneath the uniform, after all.
How can they possibly, in good conscience, obey tyrannical orders?
Especially when they took a solemn oath to "uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution against ALL enemies; foreign or domestic". And it is a fact, that any 'official' that issues an 'order' in VIOLATION of the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. IS violating the Constitution. And can therefore be held as a DOMESTIC ENEMY.
Am I lying? Or writing ANY falsehood whatsoever? Is that which is written above not FACT? Why YES, I do believe it IS FACT.
terrorist disrespecting the military and police.
Ace

Ashburn, VA

#69 May 12, 2013
I can't give you my real name but if did most likely you'd recognize me. Four months ago I uncovered money from the Obama's being funneled into Kenya. I investigated the money trail and found out that the money was used to buy a palatial plantain for the Obama's to reside in after he leaves office. My inside source, an Obama family's friend in Kenya also so told me that many of the Obama's from his fathers side who still reside in Kenya are telling others that Obama is planning to run for president of Kenya.

My first thought was that this can't be true. How could it be? But as I said I followed the money trail and during the course of my investigation I discovered that many of the Obama's reelection team have been visiting Kenya.

The investigated I started has been closed and I have been told my life is in danger if I ever discuss this publicly. I've decided that the truth is more important than my life.

I have left out a few other facts because as of yet I can not prove them. Everything else I've stated here is true and I can provide documentation that will verify the truth.

-Ace-

Since: Aug 10

United States

#70 May 12, 2013
Ace wrote:
I can't give you my real name but if did most likely you'd recognize me. Four months ago I uncovered money from the Obama's being funneled into Kenya. I investigated the money trail and found out that the money was used to buy a palatial plantain for the Obama's to reside in after he leaves office. My inside source, an Obama family's friend in Kenya also so told me that many of the Obama's from his fathers side who still reside in Kenya are telling others that Obama is planning to run for president of Kenya.
My first thought was that this can't be true. How could it be? But as I said I followed the money trail and during the course of my investigation I discovered that many of the Obama's reelection team have been visiting Kenya.
The investigated I started has been closed and I have been told my life is in danger if I ever discuss this publicly. I've decided that the truth is more important than my life.
I have left out a few other facts because as of yet I can not prove them. Everything else I've stated here is true and I can provide documentation that will verify the truth.
-Ace-
If the truth is more important han your life....why are you telling lies under a fake name?

You cant really expect anyone to believe this? You make Dan look sane!

Is this piggy messing around?
Ace

Ashburn, VA

#71 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>If the truth is more important han your life....why are you telling lies under a fake name?
You cant really expect anyone to believe this? You make Dan look sane!
Is this piggy messing around?
I can't give you my real name but if did most likely you'd recognize me. Four months ago I uncovered money from the Obama's being funneled into Kenya. I investigated the money trail and found out that the money was used to buy a palatial plantain for the Obama's to reside in after he leaves office. My inside source, an Obama family's friend in Kenya also so told me that many of the Obama's from his fathers side who still reside in Kenya are telling others that Obama is planning to run for president of Kenya.

My first thought was that this can't be true. How could it be? But as I said I followed the money trail and during the course of my investigation I discovered that many of the Obama's reelection team have been visiting Kenya.

The investigated I started has been closed and I have been told my life is in danger if I ever discuss this publicly. I've decided that the truth is more important than my life.

I have left out a few other facts because as of yet I can not prove them. Everything else I've stated here is true and I can provide documentation that will verify the truth.

-Ace-
another

Santa Fe, NM

#72 May 12, 2013
Ace wrote:
-Ace-
loony toon
Ace

Ashburn, VA

#73 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>If the truth is more important han your life....why are you telling lies under a fake name?
You cant really expect anyone to believe this? You make Dan look sane!
Is this piggy messing around?
BE QUITE!!!! I wanna see some nut like Glen Beck pick up this story.

Since: Aug 10

United States

#75 May 12, 2013
Ace wrote:
<quoted text>
BE QUITE!!!! I wanna see some nut like Glen Beck pick up this story.
Go over to the politix ste. The nutters over there believe everything

Since: Aug 10

United States

#76 May 12, 2013
Ace wrote:
<quoted text>
BE QUITE!!!! I wanna see some nut like Glen Beck pick up this story.
I'll oppose you every time you post.....damned birther!
d pantz

United States

#77 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>The decision was just 4 years ago. THE USSC deemed it the constitutional law of the land.
hmmmmm. When one reads the constitution its kinda confusing how they concluded that it was constitutional. Maybe it needs challenged again.

Since: Aug 10

United States

#78 May 12, 2013
d pantz wrote:
<quoted text> hmmmmm. When one reads the constitution its kinda confusing how they concluded that it was constitutional. Maybe it needs challenged again.
Honestly, its a double-edged sword that i am surprised to see conservatives oppose. Normally conservatives are all about states rights, especially on issues they oppose. If the residents of DC choose to ban open carry, isnt that their right to do so?

Also, I thought it was illegal to transport a firearm across state lines unless you have a special designation?
d pantz

United States

#79 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>Honestly, its a double-edged sword that i am surprised to see conservatives oppose. Normally conservatives are all about states rights, especially on issues they oppose. If the residents of DC choose to ban open carry, isnt that their right to do so?
Also, I thought it was illegal to transport a firearm across state lines unless you have a special designation?
guess it depends on the state. One thing is for sure, you and I don't want to find out! Pretty crazy doing this, but I'm still not sure if its right or wrong. States right are ok as long as you aren't sacrificing constitutional rights.

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#80 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>The militia of the constitution is now called the National Guard
Nutter playing fake soldier in the woods are completrely irrellevant! I figured you were a militia freak.....i bet mcveigh makes you proud huh?
ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:

The U.S. Congress has Constitutionally delegated authority;

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"

"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"

The "militia" is confined to whatever rules that Congress makes on the subject.

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms" is a PREEXISTING Right that was EXPRESSLY RESERVED by We The People. And has NOTHING to do with militia service whatsoever. Our hired servants are Constitutionally BOUND from "infringing" upon that right in ANY way, shape, or form. Hence the use of the prohibition; "shall NOT be infringed".

In regards to the militia, Congress does have clear delegated authority.

In regards to the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. They are expressly DENIED the authority to enact ANY law which contravenes that specific Right.

And this is borne out by not only the express terms of the U.S. Constitution. But by ALL commentary by recognized legal authorities of the period regarding the subject. Thus, ALL 'gun control laws' are Constitutionally REPUGNANT, and therefore NULL and VOID.

CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. Cowards desire to have only their 'masters' in government to be armed. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#81 May 12, 2013
FFS- wrote:
<quoted text>Honestly, its a double-edged sword that i am surprised to see conservatives oppose. Normally conservatives are all about states rights, especially on issues they oppose. If the residents of DC choose to ban open carry, isnt that their right to do so?
Also, I thought it was illegal to transport a firearm across state lines unless you have a special designation?
Does the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION APPLY IN D.C.? YES, it MOST CERTAINLY DOES.

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

CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. Cowards desire to have only their 'masters' in government to be armed. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#82 May 12, 2013
Another wrote:
<quoted text>
terrorist disrespecting the military and police.
CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. Cowards desire to have only their 'masters' in government to be armed. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?

Since: Aug 10

United States

#83 May 12, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
ALL of the current 'gun control laws' are UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
The U.S. Congress has Constitutionally delegated authority;
"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;"
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;"
The "militia" is confined to whatever rules that Congress makes on the subject.
"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms" is a PREEXISTING Right that was EXPRESSLY RESERVED by We The People. And has NOTHING to do with militia service whatsoever. Our hired servants are Constitutionally BOUND from "infringing" upon that right in ANY way, shape, or form. Hence the use of the prohibition; "shall NOT be infringed".
In regards to the militia, Congress does have clear delegated authority.
In regards to the Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms. They are expressly DENIED the authority to enact ANY law which contravenes that specific Right.
And this is borne out by not only the express terms of the U.S. Constitution. But by ALL commentary by recognized legal authorities of the period regarding the subject. Thus, ALL 'gun control laws' are Constitutionally REPUGNANT, and therefore NULL and VOID.
CRIMINALS prefer unarmed victims. Both the CRIMINALS in our governments. As well as the CRIMINALS on our streets. Cowards desire to have only their 'masters' in government to be armed. WHICH ONE ARE YOU?
More copy & paste from a nutter blog. just provide the link.

regardless of what you paste, the USSC says you are wrong. The SUPREME COURT has deems DC's open carry restriction constitutional.

THey are the supreme court, you are a nutter with a high school diploma. Its not a hard choice in who to believe

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
Texas law professor calls for repeal of Second ... (Nov '13) 2 hr Here Is One 10,904
Moms Demand Action Calls On Kroger Family Of St... 4 hr Here Is One 18
30-06 (7.62X63) vs .308 (7.62X51) (Feb '11) 4 hr Here Is One 105
Opinion Line 5 hr positronium 121
Joe Miller: 'If 20 million illegals vote, you c... 9 hr kuda 90
Katy Burns: Locked and loaded - " and only 9 ye... 11 hr Here Is One 2
One year after concealed carry, Chicago homicid... 12 hr Here Is One 1
•••

Guns People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••