A leftist judge, in an obvious attempt to make the Second Amendment look ludicrous, has ruled that the law prohibiting illegal immigrants from possessing firearms is unconstitutional.
The case at hand centered on Carbajal-Flores, who was “charged with possession of a firearm while illegally or unlawfully in the United States.” He had a handgun in his possession “in the Little Village neighborhood of Chicago, Illinois,” on June 1, 2020. He was charged for being a non-citizen in possession for a firearm.
Question 21l on the 4473 asks if the buyer is an alien illegally in the United States. The law in question is 922(g), which is the same law that prohibits felons, fugitives from justice, veterans with dishonorable discharges, citizens who have renounced their citizenship, people who are under a domestic violence restraining order, and those who have been convicted of domestic violence form owning firearms. Are we to believe that all of those people are now permitted to own firearms?
The court ruled that it is unconstitutional to prohibit someone who has never been convicted of a felony, a violent crime, or a crime involving the use of a weapon from owning a firearm. Think about the implications.
Now consider that this is the first time a Second Amendment court decision that affirms someone’s right to own a firearm hasn’t been protested by the left. Why is that? It’s because the left isn’t antigun. They are anti-people that they don’t like owning guns. Since they love everyone, including brown people, their own security details, and others who follow leftist orders, and hate themselves some white people, any gun decision that favors illegals is something the left will support.
Illegals with guns will be the left’s foot soldiers in the coming Civil War. Picture the military aged males pouring across the border, mostly with military equipment. Now ask yourself what’s going on here.
Now combine that with the man in Plant City, Florida who tried to buy a firearm while there was an ATF agent in the gun store. The agent believed that the man smelled like marijuana, so he ordered the gun store to deny the sale, even though the man had passed a background check for the handgun and denied that he was under the influence of marijuana. In a case earlier this month, the DOJ argued:
Because they are not responsible citizens, unlawful drug users and addicts do not have a Second Amendment right to possess firearms.
DOJ, in their brief for the appeal to SCOTUS of United States vs. Daniels
How is it possible that a person who uses drugs is not a responsible citizen, and can thus be denied the right to keep and bear arms, but an illegal alien, who is neither responsible nor a citizen, has Second Amendment rights?
The answer is simple: your government is at war with you. They are using the law and your rights as weapons against you.
19 Comments
oldvet50 · March 19, 2024 at 6:14 am
As I opined on another website, not only are we experiencing an invasion of the US, but now, obviously, it is an armed invasion – with Federal blessing!
Differ · March 19, 2024 at 6:53 am
The double standards, two-tier justice system, and other obvious discriminations are INTENTIONAL. They are implemented to show those of us on the “wrong” side of the issue that we are impotent to effect the return to decency, normality and the constitutionally governed US, that we want to see.
Worse yet is that the majority of those who say they would like to see that, and who would benefit most from that can’t yet understand what is going on or why. Don’t try to tell them; they don’t like the anguish of being shown the truth and will turn on you. They cannot infer the reasons for themselves either, they’ll have to feel the consequences personally before they wake up.
It will happen but not before things have gotten much worse….I pray for my children’s future.
Differ
Aesop · March 19, 2024 at 8:25 am
The Left and all its Leftard minions are jumping up and down on the cultural land mine as high and as hard as they can, trying to trigger the inevitable society-wide explosion.
They’re not going to get what they like, and they’re not going to like what they get.
https://youtu.be/jGbJZ1XlnyY?t=19
neomunitor · March 19, 2024 at 8:41 am
The only reason for this ruling to stand unopposed by the DOJ is because the current administration wants to be able to form a huge national auxiliary police force, probably an extension of US Marshals, staffed with illegals, to suppress the coming “troubles” and avoid the appearance of violating Federal gun laws and the Posse Comitatus Act. When the Feds enact emergency measures, secure the food supplies, require surrendering guns to get rations, restrict travel and set up checkpoints, these goons will be the ones manning them.
Pat H. Bowman · March 19, 2024 at 9:02 am
I’ve been saying for years that the government hates you and wants you dead. If you look at everything they do through that lens it all makes sense. I find it odd that at this stage in the game, there are those who still don’t believe me.
JimmyPx · March 19, 2024 at 9:35 pm
For those asking who so many people keep getting slapped in the face with the truth but refuse to accept it, you know why. It’s called Normalcy Bias and people will go to great lengths not to change their view of the country, World and reality.
Of course the mainstream media pumps the propaganda into their minds every day, “college age athletes drop dead with their heart every day nothing to see here”, “Parts come off airplanes every day it’s just coincidence that they are all Boeings”, “Your a racist anti-semite if you notice the people behind so much belong to a very small minority”, “Israel is our greatest ally”, “Forget all of the lying statistics and your lying eyes that 13% of the population commits most of the violent crimes”, etc etc.
Brainwashed normies will argue about the above and call you names if you show fact after fact about them. They have their World view and you are NOT going to change your mind. It’s like my MIL, she’s an old hippy almost 80 and in her mind John and Bobby Kennedy are still around as is Martin Luther King. She takes every thing CNN and MSNBC say as the Gospel and if I question anything I’m a kook.
Sadly you can’t help these people, they refuse to see reality and trying to argue what reality is is pointless.
Stealth Spaniel · March 19, 2024 at 11:02 pm
“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”
Barack Obama
Well, here we are. And the Magic Negro was not talking about White Folks.
Bear in Indy · March 20, 2024 at 12:39 am
Pat H. Bowman,
Sir, I would not have believed what you had to say, even a week ago.
I, foolishly, still had faith in America. That is no longer so. The elites, of both parties, hate us-the average Americans. And, I am sure this summer will be a bloodbath (see how carelessly I used that word) far greater than the “summer of love”, in 2020.
I really do not believe there is a way to save what is left of America. When the left/Democrats openly mock our rights, justice system, and tell us, we should not exist; and the “might Right” does not say anything; the left has won. American Marxism won. Not being a defeatist, just a realist at this stage of the game. FJB, F the Federal government, and F Both Political parties.
Bear in Indy
D · March 20, 2024 at 12:39 pm
I honestly have no problem with this.
If you aren’t currently incarcerated or in a secure area (like a court room), you should be allowed to own a gun.
If you repeatedly shout “fire” in a crowded theater (and there is no fire), you’ll get fined…but the government doesn’t cauterize that section of your brain that allows you to say the word “fire”. Once you’d paid your fine and/or served your jail time, your right and ability to speak hasn’t been removed.
Why do we allow them to do that with other rights like guns?
Divemedic · March 20, 2024 at 2:45 pm
This is akin to saying that it is a violation of someone’s rights to tell them that they can’t have a gun while they are robbing a bank, or burglarizing your house. It isn’t the act of owning the gun that I have a problem with- it’s the fact that they are permitted to ignore the border, enter the country illegally, then have any rights at all.
If you break into my house, you have no right to anything that is inside of it. If you break into my country, you don’t have any rights.
Otherwise, you might as well let them vote, too.
J. Farmer · March 20, 2024 at 4:52 pm
“…you might as well let them vote, too.”
As they will, soon, brother–as they will. soon.
D · March 20, 2024 at 7:50 pm
The government doesn’t grant rights. I *have* rights. Inalienable rights. Just like you do. Not by virtue of being born on a random place on the globe or across some arbitrary political line.
The Declaration doesn’t say “all natural born or naturalized citizens that have passed whatever arbitrary immigration process”. It says “*all* men are created equal” and endowed with rights.
I have no problem with them owning a gun. I have no problem with you owning a gun.
I don’t care if you knocked over a bank when you were 21, served your time, and were released from jail. Your rights don’t go magically go away simply because government decides they do.
> If you break into my house, you have no right to anything that is inside of it.
Agreed. Where they attempt to violate your rights, you can use force to stop them…buuuut….if they break in, it’s not a free pass to torture them to death. Or rape them. Or chain them to the sink and make them an indentured servant for the next 20 years. Or perform medical experiments on them. Their rights don’t disappear when they committed a crime.
> If you break into my country
Your country? It’s my country too. We share it with ~320,000,000 other people.
Exactly how much of I-5 do you own and how is some illegal preventing you from using it?
If some illegal crosses from Mexico into the US on I-5, can you point to the piece of took from you?
Public property is exactly that. Public. Everyone get to use it because we *all* paid for it.
I’m sure you’re thinking “gotcha! Illegals didn’t pay for it.”
Well, my 5-year-old didn’t pay for the local public playground either, but *everyone* gets to use it.
Some Canadian taking a vacation in the US didn’t pay taxes for the road either.
I’d love to hear from anyone…if an illegal immigrant crosses the imaginary line on the map into this country….how *exactly* will it harm you? And whatever harm you come up with, prove to me it’s not government that’s actually harming you or preventing you from protecting yourself.
I’ve probably heard all the arguments–like they’re living on welfare which is costing you and I billions. Yup. Why the fuck is government giving away free shit to *ANYONE*? Illegal or not, the government should NOT be stealing from one group to give to another group.
Like I said, I don’t care who wonders into this country. If they intend to harm me, my family, or my neighbors, I will respond accordingly. If they want to steal my shit, I will stop them. Government is the only thing that will try to stop that. Government is the problem, not human beings crossing imaginary lines.
Divemedic · March 20, 2024 at 7:55 pm
Ah, the Libertarian tenet of “we are all citizens of the world and borders shouldn’t exist.” Aesop is correct, you sound as though you read an Ayn Rand book once, and didn’t bother to see how the real world works.
So let me ask you- what happens when people sneak into your country, take up arms, and decide that they don’t want to live under your libertarian ideals? They aren’t residents, they are invaders. Invaders don’t have rights. They are invaders.
Ask the Navajo, the Seminoles, or the Apache how that works out. Maybe they will let us have a casino.
Skeptic · March 21, 2024 at 7:59 am
Nailed it. And this is why Libertarians can’t be taken seriously.
And I’m amazed that no one else pointed out the obvious. The judge was black. Jul
Divemedic · March 21, 2024 at 8:15 am
This is your Libertarian party. The party supporting illegal immigration even harder than the Democrats
https://twitter.com/LouisianaLp/status/1770470050392056109
D · March 21, 2024 at 11:04 am
> Ah, the Libertarian tenet of “we are all citizens of the world and borders shouldn’t exist.”
Let me re-phrase that for you. We are all human beings, and government shouldn’t be controlling what you do as long as you aren’t harming anyone or damaging property.
> So let me ask you- what happens when people sneak into your country, take up arms, and decide that they don’t want to live under your libertarian ideals?
That’s not a difficult question to answer.
What if someone wants to live like a communist? They can. It doesn’t harm me. In fact, as a kid I remember there was a “commune” in our county. It was 15-20 people who all moved to a large plot of land and they grew food and shared it with the group. The more mechanically inclined helped fix cars. Some built houses barns and sheds. It worked well for a few years, then the fighting began and it totally collapsed as you’d expect.
It didn’t hurt me. They all probably learned a valuable lesson.
I think what you mean to ask is “what if they decide to take up arms and *force* me to do what *they* want”.
But that’s a simple answer. I use force to stop them.
By any reasonable and rational account, it’s easy to see our country is being invaded by “fighting age males” from countries that don’t share the American ideals of freedom. If they decide to attack, make sure you’re a better shot and kill them.
A government that was Constitutional would deploy troops to protect your rights should they decide to start trying to kill you, but we haven’t been a Constitutional Republic in a long, long time.
Divemedic · March 21, 2024 at 11:19 am
Just shoot them. OK. How is that working for the Mexicans who live in the cartel controlled areas? No? How about women in areas controlled by the Taliban? What about any of the nations who are under the power of warlords? Somalia? Yemen?
So what is government for? It says so right in the founding documents:
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed
This is my problem with the entire libertarian platform- they are a bunch of romanticists with delusions that their fellow man wont use whatever means possible to subjugate others and who have no more of an idea how the world works than do the communists.
Like communism, libertarianism relies upon your fellow man not being the complete selfish bastards that history has shown us they are.
We have nations with borders because it enables us to keep out those who would invade and violate the rights of the people who are already here.
Where this nation went wrong is that it enabled the government to grow too powerful. As George Washington said- “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence-it is force! Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.”
Vlad · March 21, 2024 at 6:22 pm
D- “I’d love to hear from anyone…if an illegal immigrant crosses the imaginary line on the map into this country….how *exactly* will it harm you?”
I used to pound nails framing for a living before becoming a firefighter.
Worked with guys that had done it for decades. Crew after crew of “No hablas” showed up and guess what? They worked so much cheaper than the white, citizen crews that the white guys couldn’t get work to support their families.
Driving down wages because they live 3 families to a house fucks the citizen worker. Inviting them, then supporting them is saying, “Welcome to your new third world shithole.” It was nice while it lasted.
D · March 21, 2024 at 2:38 pm
> How is that working for the Mexicans who live in the cartel controlled areas? No? How about women in areas controlled by the Taliban? What about any of the nations who are under the power of warlords? Somalia? Yemen?
I would assume pretty poorly, but not because the government failed to secure a border…but rather because their governments don’t acknowledge or support the inherent rights of the people like our government is supposed to.
> This is my problem with the entire libertarian platform- they are a bunch of romanticists with delusions that their fellow man wont use whatever means possible to subjugate others and who have no more of an idea how the world works than do the communists.
Apply that same logic to the United States. Our government is nothing more than a large specially protected mafia. You better pay them their tribute (property taxes) or else something bad might happen to you…you know…like getting beaten, shot, or caged like a dog.
Again, given a very limited government like the Constitution was written for…how could they possibly deal with things like invasion, some random evil person trying to enslave others, rapists, etc…? Have police deal with them instead of looking for people who are doing 3 over or have their grass too high or look for morons who light plants on fire and inhale. Have the courts deal with them instead spending weeks on end deciding what “function of the trigger” means when the elephant in the room says “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”.
And of course you don’t put all your eggs into one basket. Having an armed populace capable of dealing with threats when they arise is an insanely good idea. What’s the difference between armed gangs roaming the neighborhood to steal/kill/rape under Taliban rule verses armed gangs roaming the neighborhood to steal/rape/kill here in the United States? It’s not only the people who acknowledge that shit won’t be put up with, but it’s also government enforcing their minimum mandate of protecting individual rights (along with the force to back it up). Of course that force also steals/rapes/kills and frequently gets away with it. They just call it “qualified immunity”.
> libertarianism relies upon your fellow man not being the complete selfish bastards that history has shown us they are
That’s 100% incorrect. Typical human behavior is selfish. The Constitution acknowledges that by letting people do whatever they want *as long as they aren’t harming anyone else or damaging property*. And that seems to be the core belief of the libertarian party as well. (Well…that and smoking weed 24/7).
> We have nations with borders because it enables us to keep out those who would invade and violate the rights of the people who are already here.
Yes, much like a restraining order stops an abuser from attacking and killing his ex, the border is totally stopping bad shit.
> Where this nation went wrong is that it enabled the government to grow too powerful.
I 100% agree with that statement.
Now for just a moment, pretend the federal government wasn’t allowed to do any border enforcement and wasn’t allowed to erect a wall and wasn’t allowed to steal from you and I to give to anyone they please.
How could you, or your neighborhood, or your community, or your church, or your hospital, or your state deal with any issues you can think of? (invasion, mass shooter, gang trying to enslave you, etc…)
Comments are closed.