Search results

  1. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    I see you are having difficulty quoting from the Caetano decision, Joe. Could it be that the case doesn't address the topic at all, despite your claims to the contrary? You have also gone quiet on the topic of the 1789.. or was it 1794 Bill of Rights. Does this mean you spent 30 seconds and...
  2. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    I realize that you are slow, Joe. But you claimed this - only a few days ago. Now, Joe - it is a really short decision - please quote from it to back up your claim. Don't quote an article that you clearly misunderstand - quote the actual SCOTUS decision.
  3. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    Where does the decision ever suggest that you are only allowed to defend yourself in the home, Joe? Please quote _from_ the decision.
  4. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    When will you be retracting all of your wrong shit, Joe? Or will we be going through your normal process where you drop the topic for some time, only to bring it up again - in the same wrong way - 6 months from now?
  5. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    And you think that means: Learn to fucking read, Joe. If a court decision does not address something, that means there is no decision on it. Volokh points this out, and your hot take is that "one of those awful libertarians agrees with me"? Where does he agree with you?
  6. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    Who would of thought I was actually a lawyer who argues in front of the SC.
  7. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    And yet controllers still make the militia argument for the 2A. Maybe you should read that paragraph in Heller again.
  8. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    I see. So which one do you believe is the federal definition? Yes, we are all aware of your ability to ignore anyone who owns AWs yet is nominally on your side.
  9. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    Joe, you post over and over that "assault weapons" are to dangerous for a civilian to own. Since there is no federal definition anymore, we can only go by how various states define them. You have praised NJ laws before; yet you don't seem to believe in their definition of AWs - why is that?
  10. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    Is that how you would describe it, Joe? No more ugly gun ban, no more $1000 permit, no caliber bans, no registration.
  11. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    Anyone who thought about Kolbe or Peruta for a minute of 2 knew what the result was going to be the minute each court decided to rehear it en banc, Joe.
  12. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    Oh yes, the Kolbe ruling. The one where a group of "learned" judges explained to us that technology that is over 100 years old is dangerous and unusual.
  13. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    I would of expected that the Caetano ruling was short enough that you wouldn't need someone to summarize it for you, Joe.
  14. B

    Stun Guns: Dangerous and Unusual?

    Hmm, I can't seem to find a SCOTUS decision that states this, Joe. Want to find a quote that actually states this, or are you going to just run with Henderson's dream?
Top