Re: SCOTUS striking down NY gun law

Skip to first unread message


Dec 26, 2022, 11:57:35 PM12/26/22
On 07 Dec 2022, "Scout" <>
posted some news:tmqhps$js67$

> "Gronk" <inv...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:tmodve$5qrd$
>> bigdog wrote:
>>> On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 12:05:11 AM UTC-5, Gronk wrote:
>>>> bigdog wrote:
>>>>> SCOTUS struck down the NY gun law that said people needed a
>>>>> special reason
>>>>> to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon. This is just common
>>>>> sense. Would
>>>>> anyone think it would be acceptable for a state law requiring a
>>>>> special reason to
>>>>> exercise free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press,
>>>>> or any other of
>>>>> our basic liberties protected by the Bill of Rights.
>>>> All of those have restrictions (e.g., shouting fire in a crowded
>>>> theatre when there
>>>> isn't a fire).
>>>> Go review Heller...
>>> These restrictions do not constitute a special need. Nobody needs a
>>> special need to practice
>>> any of our basic, constitutionally protected liberties, including
>>> the right to keep and bear arms.
>> No special need means those restrictions are fine.
> And just like that Rudy shows his inability to read for
> comprehension..... but we're suppose to accept his claims about what
> he's read without question.

Rudy translation: "inability" = "refusal".

There's a difference.


Dec 27, 2022, 10:20:52 AM12/27/22

"Slater" <> wrote in message
Maybe, but in all his time here Rudy has NEVER demonstrated any ability to
read for comprehension as such an assertion of "refusal" assumes facts not
in evidence.

Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages