Bertfish
Throw bread on me
Bud you've got 12/20 last posts showing on the home screen right now. Slow down before a Mod knocks you down
Bud you've got 12/20 last posts showing on the home screen right now. Slow down before a Mod knocks you down
I think that relying on her "crazy" to keep this bill from becoming law is a poor strategy when Progressives hold the entirety of the legislative and executive branches.
I did get some snippets of SJL's lunacy in this video. She actually "held" an AR-15. Instant subject matter expert! She then explained that an AR-15 "weighs more than 10 boxes" and uses ".50 caliber ammunition."
It's easy to laugh and dismiss this as going nowhere, but I wouldn't take anything for granted at this point. We are truly living the Chinese curse of "interesting times."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-RrKiuP2GE&t=368s
I apologize, but I have to do this whenever the opportunity presents itself. What box? How heavy is it?
WHAT’S IN THE BOX!
One possible interpretation is that a bill so ridiculous is proposed so that it's laughed at and other more subtle assaults on our liberty can be snuck through. The direction we are headed will match her ultimate goals, excepting a minimal number of hunting weapons. ????
Consider this opinion of the Supreme Court:
The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land, and any statue, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for both the Constitution and a law violating it to be valid; one must prevail.
This is succinctly stated as follows:
The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it.
An unconstitutional law, in legal contemplation, is as inoperative as if it had never been passed.
Such a statute leaves the question that it purports to settle just as it would be had the statute not been enacted.
Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principals follow that it imposes no duties, confers no rights, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it . . .
A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one.
An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing valid law.
Indeed, insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, it is superseded thereby.
No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.
— Sixteenth American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, Section 177. (late 2nd Ed. Section 256)
I think MD democrats will see this bill, as good common sense gun safety. I mean, if you aren't a bad guy, with bad intentions, why would you oppose it? What do you have to hide? It's for the children, think of the children. If you don't agree, you want dead children, and have blood on your hands.
I think the whole bill is a bit too much to try to shove down our throats, but being MD, they'll try to enact it piece by piece. I figured we still had a few years of mild freedom left, but the left controlling the senate, house and POTUS, I think they are power hungry and set on vengeance. As crazy as bill HR127 is, I think we'll see many more of these in the next 4 years. Similar, or multiple pieces of her bill, hoping some of it get thru. They'll claim it's not an infringement on your 2A, as long as a government psychologist, your spouse, former spouse and coworkers feel it is acceptable for you to have that right. But, it's not an infringement, lol. Neither is the poll tax, I mean safety fee of $800, that of course will only go towards gun safety programs. Think of bill HR127 as a movie trailer. The wildest, craziest parts of this show that they'll eventually show us. Again, this is all about control, NOT safety by any measure.
What ammo?
Archeologists 1,000 years from now are going to require unexploded ordnance specialists to accompany every study.
Archeologists 1,000 years from now are going to require unexploded ordnance specialists to accompany every study.