thedruid

Not shocking to anyone paying attention

It was sarcasm

The world. This is Dr evil level crap. I swear this timeline fell into an Austin Powers loop.

So. Let me get this straight. He’s gonna trust the guy that helped him overthrow the government with defense of said government

Morons gonna moron.

Tough. States rights, dontcha agree Donny boy?

Well alrighty then, he’s a dangerous asshole

No. It didn’t. No. This kinda if flat out propaganda tells you Wich outlet is in Trump’s pocket.

Put Newsweek on the list

He’s been a closet racist all his life. Look how he supported Thurman, his close friend

I live here too

I’m sorry, didn’t we tell Elon to fuck off?

He’s a megalomaniacal egomaniac presenting with extreme narcissism

In other words hes an asshole

That would explain it

Hmm. I’m 58 and I’ve written many.

I guess it just depends on what people like.

Um. You ok ? What have I said to offend you so? Did I call you a name or something?

I’m a bit confused as to why you won’t just have a civil discussion?

It has been established as I shared it earlier. .

But quite frankly in this timeline it doesn’t matter trump and his Nazi cronies will do as they please

Umm. I don’t own a modern firearm

Don’t be so antagonistic. No one’s asking for sympathy. Why so angry?

No. In my state you cannot unless you pay for the classes , fingerprinting and background checks , etc…

Do not get me wrong I am for classes , and background checks.

I don’t believe those should cost the prospective owner though.

Now if there was no cost and those were required, I wouldn’t say a word. I hope my point is a bit clearer

Miller v. US, 230 F2d 489 “The claim and exercise of a Constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.”

Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham 394 U.S. 147 (1969). “Persons faced with an unconstitutional licensing law which purports to require a license as a prerequisite to exercise of right… may ignore the law and engage with impunity in exercise of such right.”

US Supreme Court in Hurtado v. California 110 US 516: “The state cannot diminish the rights of the people.”

Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F2d 946(1973) “… there can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of constitutional rights”

Also in Murdock: “a person cannot be compelled “to purchase, through a license fee or a license tax, the privilege freely granted by the constitution.”"

Jesus Christ what’s the matter with you! I didn’t think id see the same type of insulting children here as on reddit. What ever happened to civil discourse?

It is though. The constitution is the law and it does give supremacy to the feds. Meaning a state or municipal law gives way to federal laws when there are none.