@@danjohnston9037 couldn’t resist a joke, bare arms 😂.......so glad it wasn’t read by a Grizzly with big paws.... Bear arms 🤣 have a great day, gotta smile and have a giggle life is way to short. 😊
@@202mahina its a non with standing clause the clause does not require a militia to own guns. its an example of a reason "the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. it doesnt say the rights of a well regulated militia. the rights is to the people. read the federalist papers its spells it out more clearly. regulated in 1791 ment to make regular not what regulated means today. bad faith argument you lose.
An armed society is a polite society. We have talked about the slippery slope and death by a thousand cuts for to long. No gun control means a free population. If you trade your freedoms for security you will soon find out that you have neither. Historically, people have always voted their freedoms away and will continue to do so. 14 Republicans are traitors and should not be relelected.
@@JCSJesusChristSaves An armed Society is a scared Society not a polite Society don't confuse the two . You have the same old tired BS argument ! You go to the two extremes and completely ignore the giant Canyon in between them . ... Today's NRA is nothing like the NRA that I knew growing up . Today's NRA are just pimps for gun manufacturers ! They show no concern about gun safety or education , instead they just deal through fear-mongering .
@@ronaldrenegade8519 The end of what, criminals running around committing gun crimes with no worries about citizens protecting themselves or their families?
The Founding Fathers and the American people had just fought off a tyrannical government when the 2nd Amendment was placed in the Constitution. It is a deterrent against potential tyrants; therefore shall not be infringed.
@@WilsonAutoworks They are upset law abiding citizens can now protect themselves. They're brainwashed into believing that's a bad thing. The far left have shown to be the epitome of gullibility.
@@WilsonAutoworks - A constitution written over 246 years ago. The founding fathers would never have conceived the need or granted someone to use an AR-15
@@WilsonAutoworks the same people saying that we need to defund the police are also saying that you need them for protection. Their minds are so open that their brains fell out.
We need to bring back self defense in NY These tyrants will do their best to put people behind bars for self defense. Apparently criminals have more rights than normal hard working citizens.
That will effect the crime though bc people will be shooting back and stopping repeat offenders that’s why the mayor is so upset bc people only vote for her bc she needs the violence to get votes
@@RJGa me either, court buildings and other places where the government will want more control, will probably argue for time place and manner restrictions...(military installation, federal buildings etc, the government will have to assume the duty to protect occupants, same with private property that bars firearms). Idk we will see. I hope america quickly returns to their roots, fearing god, and his moral laws.
That's funny because I think you'll find you can't have a gun on you at a NRA convention when Trump and Pence are on stage or even at CPAC. I mean I thought everyone was safer when there are more guns around?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State; the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." - Constitution "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
Murdock v Pennsylvania - no state may convert a liberty into a privilege, issue a license and issue a fee. Madison v Murberry - in the event a state converts your right into a privilege, you can ignore the license and fee and engage in your right with impunity.
So you're asking yourself why? Well, the SCOTUS has ruled twice that the police do not have to or obligated to save you from a violent crime. This is why everyone who can, needs to be armed because they aren't going to help you. Uvalde was a great representation and example of why we need arms to save ourselves and the people around us at all times.
Exactly... Safety is a matter of avoiding or altering that which is unsafe.. No one needs a cop for that.. And then for those that may feel the need for a cop.. what's the guarantee to having one if and when such "need" arrives 🤔 👀 ????
Yeah... then they should make tanks and missiles launchers way more cheaper for self defence. I've the right to defend myself against someone carrying an assault rifle!!!
@@walterbo7687 “Assault” rifles for civilians that are full automatic are illegal. The term “assault rifle” has been falsely assigned to common sporting rifles such as the AR15 and AK47 which in civilian configuration are SEMI AUTOMATIC not FULL AUTOMATIC. It’s better to keep your thoughts to yourself and be thought a fool rather than expressing them and removing all doubt. You obviously have no clue what an “assault rifle” is.
@@walterbo7687 We can own a tank and and rocket launcher. However, your kind is scared of firearms, so there isnt ever any chance of you defending yourself from anything. Now shut tf up
@@recoveringnewyorker2243 Its a Weapon and as such People sould have the Right to use it? By this Theory the Bann is unconstitutional as well. His Example still works, cause its a deliberat overexateration to hammer in the Point. This Decition will lead to the Dead of many People. But carrying a Gun will not lead into more savety.
Read as a Subordinate clause. Because a well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
You are really stupid Fire Storm, NY has this strict standards since 1919. There is a strong argument against the 2nd amendment. You don't want people to shoot each bother over a car crash. NY is too densely populated
@@202mahina there are no laws preventing it, just subversive fed ops destroying them all from the inside. Nothing for them to strike down. Would love to see the patriot act go next as under the 4th amendment.
As a Liberal I agree with the ruling. The constitution says you have the right to bear arms. What New York and other states had in place made it a privilege to have a gun instead of allowing it to be a intrinsic right. Current events aside, because the Supreme Court is about determining what is and isn't constitutional, I feel they made the right choice because the constitution says we have the right to bear arms. New York was like, 'you need a reason that we deem worthy for you to bear arms in public', that doesn't seems that constitutional to me. If people want to control guns and make a change, that's the job of the government.
I salute you, much respect, its rare to see a liberal now a days respecting the constitution! I totally agree with 100% Whats the problem with law abiding citizens carrying there guns the criminals do it every day!
The Right of the PEOPLE to Keep and BEAR Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! The government has NO AUTHORITY to restrict, regulate, or deny this Absolute, Inherent, Unalienable Right. Just as they cannot restrict the First Amendment, or the rest of the Bill of Rights. Our Inherent Rights are not dependent on the actions of criminals, the approval of government, or the misguided, self-righteous, and uninformed opinions of the masses.
It means that you cannot, ever, undermine the inalienable right of the law abiding citizens to carry a firearm for their self-protection, The criminals, who ignore gun control laws, can no longer commit there crimes with virtual impunity.
Any law maker or official that tries to undermine this ruling will be shut down in court and ultimately challenged nationwide. Talking about how to get around the supreme court ruling is just stupid.
if it were me.. I would ban concealed weapons outright and make it a felony.. if you want to play cowboy then strap on your holster.. concealing weapons is not a right.. bear it proudly
My ex criminal BF who grew up in a gang neighborhood refused to own a gun because he said it was too easy to use it when he got angry at someone. He didn't want to end up in prison for life.
@Democrats getting smoked in November He had anger issues like a lot of "normal" people. Many of the rest of the people he knew owned guns. He didn't want to end up in prison like many of them did.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel alito made reference to the New York gun laws in the supreme Court opinion that it did nothing to prevent the Buffalo New York shooting.
this law means no more Special need reason for carry permit. Sensitive places will be the next fight. Also, this ruling suggests more strict scrutiny on lower courts deciding gun control bills like banning firearms example ar-15 or overturning them. Thats how i read it
@@adamlynch9153 No, but I’m thinking they are going to try to make it as hard as they can and most likely going to see another lawsuit in the future about this
You don't. They have just made you believe and act like you do. Its Pavlov's Dog all over again. They have conditioned most people to behave they way they want. Break the conditioning. Walk with God and this world can not stop you.
@@STOPPOLICECORRUPTION Unless those thousands actually USED their guns to commit a crime, they are being ILLEGALLY imprisoned! Mere possession of a firearm should never be a crime, period! We should not be required to have a license, permit, whatever, to LAWFULLY own and carry the defensive weapons of our choice, openly or concealed!
I think the opinion address much more than just carry and scrutiny concerns. Thomas clearly states on page 19 of his opinion that the 2nd amendment applies to all modern firearms as well.
@Michael Douglas Whitted Funny. You don't give the Founders credit for the technological advances that were occurring in their very lifetimes. Look up the Puckle gun. And semi-auto rifles came into being in 1885 -- over 135 years ago, just 111 years after they declaration independence from England.
It’s not an absolute right. Nothing is an absolute right. You can still have gun control/restrictions like background checks, restrictions for mental health’s conditions or criminal history, and for the type of gun.
@@likelovetothelost no it is an absolute right and these rules and regulations are unconstitutional. No other amendment has these arbitrary regulations. Would you be ok with the 19th amendment being treated the same? Women can only vote in some elections and only if they have no mental illness? All you are doing is pushing for more and more government control. Literally just slow creeping gun control until the only people who can feasibly own one is the guards hired to protect the rich elites.
240 years ago, The United States did not have a standing Army, so our founding fathers included the 2nd Amendment. For what reason? Well, it’s the first few words in the Amendment. 👇🏼 A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
After the bombing of Pearl Harbor Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto said “We cannot invade the US mainland. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.“
"Regulated" was the word chosen to imply that the Citizens should be proficient in the handling and use of their arms. NOT "Regulated" by the Government as to limit the use of said arms.The Constitution was put in place to protect the Citizens from the Government, Not to protect the Government from the Citizens. To interpret the Constitution you must remember to use the language of the day in which it was written.
Part of the reason for the 2nd was to provide for defense against an outside aggressor; but that was only PART of the reason. There is a reason they put the word "free" in from of "State": sometimes the State itself can be the enemy of freedom. In such a case, the 2nd provides the ability of the people to defend their freedoms against a tyrannical State.
@@recoveringnewyorker2243 Don't forget the over million American privately owned firearms send to the United Kingdom during the early days of world war II. After the disaster of Dunkirk, the British home guard was handing out sharpen rebar and try to build an many sten as possible out of plumbing parts.
The old tired “militia is the national guard” argument. I counter with the “unorganized militia” found in federal law. 10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are- (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
The founders didn't specify place where you can carry because if they thought of one they would have put it in there. Not having one in the right means citizens can carry anywhere.
If someone is going to conceal a weapon and commit a crime, they aren’t caring about the law and location. Why would someone go through all the work of providing fingerprints, waiting for a license and do the mandatory training to just commit a crime . This law targets people that want to protect themselves against those that want to do harm for not reason. There’s no interpreting the 2nd amendment. It was written that way on purpose. Protecting your life doesn’t only stop at home
Bingo. Thats also why every states ccw permit should be valid in every other state. I take a background check to obtain it, two actually, and yet i still cannot carry in california. Thats bogus. All that tells me, is they dont trust their own background checks, ironically the same ones who keep letting known mentally unstable people get guns...... hmmmmm
If your Country is so messed up you have to carry a Gun around then you got a Problem. Second, its easy to spot a Shooter. You know the Guys who are more numberous then Days. But if its legal to walk around whit your Machinegun, no one can stop you until you open Fire. More Guns create more Problems, thats a fact. Amfact backed up by Intelligence. How many Shootings occured in America this Year. How many occured in Afghanistan? Its less then 2% last time I checked.
@@Sunaki1000 oh shut tf up. Being able to legally carry a gun because one chooses to isnt a big deal. You people need to get over yourselves before we do it for you.
the 2nd amendment is an absolute RIGHT protection by the Constitution. The problem is that State Statues conflix with the Constitution and this is why the supremacy clause exist.
Well the fact that 96 percent of the population wants background checks makes it pretty clear we do want it infringed. We don't want criminals to have guns but here you are arguing for them to have it. You people deserve to be personally affected by this. Your concealed carry won't protect your kids when they're at a public pool and your back is turned. It won't protect you in a dark movie theater when someone starts firing at you and you can't see them. It won't protect you on a street when you walk past a coffee shop and psychos bullets fly though a window and hit you in the head. It also won't protect you when you pull it out and you mistakenly shoot an innocent bystander while trying to play Rambo. It's an irrefutable fact that permits decrease gun crimes. This is the most egregious miscarriage of law in the name of profit through politics I have ever seen in my relatively long life. I'm ashamed and apalled at what this country is becoming. Cowards who need to exist in a world of feel good tough guy buzzwords and catch phrases and Boogeymen are fueling the Republican party. They've turned their back on all senses of decency logic or true patriotism. Patriotism is being willing to die to protect your fellow countrymen not killing your fellow countrymen to protect yourself.
They still need to acquire a permit. This only means that they can not be refused permits like New York was doing. The liberals will find a way around the laws like they always do. They'll tie people up for years with red tape or some other BS.
Sadly lots of business owners and shopping places still ban guns, and lots of people surely dont feel comfortable seeing people carrying around guns when they dont know that the intention is or plan is. Times have changed and with demonic teens and people having easy access to semi-automatic weapons we will see more shootings in schools and public places.
People were already going to times square with concealed guns, it was just limited to people with the right political connections or who had enough money to get someone to sign off on getting the permit.
Really love when the 'lawyer' Jessica says, "It doesn't mean the the 2nd Amendment is an absolute right." ...Oh, really. You do know what "shall not be infringed" means, right? Breyer's comment and everyone looking at shootings in today's society actually proves the need for every law abiding citizen to have the ability to defend themselves against a firearm wielding attacker WITH a their own firearm!
Take a look at Texas, if that were to happen here in CA we’d have to result to fending for our children given the defunding of the police. I’m not saying we should all play Cop but how do you stop a bad guy with a gun? Place more good guys with guns on the streets, bet people won’t initiate a fight as much as they do now.
Imagine having to spend 100k+ on a degree just to “understand” the constitution that’s written in plain English 🤣💀. It’s sad these people are considered intellectuals
You sound so dum, NY has these strict rules since 1919. NY is too crowded and dense. You cannot have everyone walking with guns in a crowded area. The jury has a 6/9 majority, these right wing judges don't care about NY
Ummmm.... you DO need to understand the Bill of Rights within the context of the time they were written. Why? Because human rights are universal and timeless, and they do not belong to governments -- they belong to everyone!
No. The court has decided that a state can not mandate a special reason for someone to conceal carrying a weapon. States can and will still require people to apply for a permit. It's just they can't deny you. Unless you're a felon or mentally ill.
This was actually a really good piece. It just gave the facts. The anchors didn’t show any real bias and neither did the guests. They explained the methods used by the court and how it may impact things going further. Well done CBS.
Elise, a Republican, supports the ruling. The governor of New York, a democrat, disagrees with the ruling. This country is divided with respect to party lines. What a damn shame!
If NYS did feel the need to violate there citizens constitutional rights they would not be in this situation... If they were more concerned about criminals and keeping guns away from criminals instead of trying to violate law-abiding citizens this State might be a better place to live but they spend more time worrying about criminals and criminals rights... A criminal is not going to worry about the fact if he has a high capacity magazine has gone he's going to commit a crime using the weapon... And all the recent laws that are Governor has passed are going to end up the same way as being unconstitutional especially the red flag law... The problem is politician doesn't matter what party they come from Republican or Democrat they spend their lives as being professional politicians trying to take away mine and you are right because they know what's better my thinking is that we need to take away what's the most important thing to them we need to institute term limits on the state and national level.. there's no reason in the world for somebody to be a professional politician their whole life an example is Chuck Schumer when was the last time that guy realized what it's like to be an average everyday person? He has always perks always freebies he's out of touch with reality the guy who's never had a real job and his whole life..
If you work a 12 hr shift and have a 1 hr commute each way the majority of your day is outside the home. So these laws say that you can't protect yourself the majority of the time if you happen to work alot or travel alot for work. Truckers, salesmen, etc stay away from home for days at a time........
While true, it also prevents extreme cases of government take over of its people in cases such Mao(40 million), Stalin(23 million) and Hitler(17 million).
Yes sir it is!! & we love it. Land of the free & home of the brave because our freedom is dangerous. This country was not meant for the faint hearted or for cowards. More guns plzzz 🇺🇸⚔️🦅
Now when a criminal commits an armed robbery, they have to deal with armed victims and nearby armed spectators, chances are the armed suspect will be shot by their victims.
@@laurataylornyc9 It’s better than NOT being able to respond. Crossfire is a definite consideration. However, I believe most law abiding concealed carry holders will obtain training to deal with bad situation‘s. Besides the criminals will now think twice before committing a crime in the first place.
@@laurataylornyc9 You really don't want law abiding citizens to be disarmed. You think you do, but you don't because then it's completely one-sided, and it ain't our side with the upper hand.
@@Smasho8000 You think you know what I want? REALLY? Get a grip! Read the law, which doesn’t disarm anyone. Try to understand why it was but into effect for the past 100 years. Alternatively, go for a walk at night in Harlem or ride the subway to the South Bronx or South Ozone Park and test your delusional theory.
The second amendments doesn’t say the right to bear arms in the house but just the right to bear arms. Which translate in it out of the home. These dam politicians these days Interpretate the constitution like it’s a Enigma. It’s not hard to understand what it says for the second amendment.
Nothing new here for anyone who knows what the words "to keep and bear mean". This was long overdue and our right to self-defense does not end at our front door!
The big story here is the word bear means you do not need to show a special need to protect yourself in the same way a wealthy or famous individual can carry.
I applaud the courage of SCOTUS to stand up to a heated environment based on current events. I also condemn them for their utter ignorance of improperly applying historical standards. We should aspire to be more civilized than we were two centuries ago.
The reasons for the second amendment are just as valid today as they were when they were written. Same as the first amendment. Before the invention of the internet or phone.
Actually they aren't because the second amendment was clearly meant for the defense of the country and that was when we didn't have a standing army and now that we do it's really irrelevant. People keep acting like the founding fathers received the Constitution from on high when in reality it's just a bunch of Patchwork compromises made by primitive people who owned slaves and likely most of them thought the Earth was the center of the universe
Sadly, even when police are there not everyone will be treated equal; imagine a black young father with a gun walking around, the police will shoot him just for that, than may say oops thought he was the criminal, imagine everyone with guns and if there is a shooter the police will have a hard time knowing which is the shooter and which is the victim. I dont like guns at all, but think semi-automatic should not be sold to anyone unless they are in the Military or police. Sorry but not everyone is out to deer hunt. Too many road rages out there and paranoid people plus crazy wicked teens like the Tops and Uvalde and Columbine ones who just feel like killing; and have no criminal history. The greedy NRA only care about themselves as do the politicians who support them; why? Well they never had to bury their own kids, since thier kids go to private schools, have body guards and have the best schools with security. They dont give a hoot about anyones kids or granma who happens to just go grocery shopping and gets killed by a nut, whoes bigot daddy just gives them the gun.
Yeah... then they should make tanks and missiles launchers way more cheaper for self defence. I've the right to defend myself against someone carrying an assault rifle!!!
Yeah... then they should make tanks and missiles launchers way more cheaper for self defence. I've the right to defend myself against someone carrying an assault rifle!!!
@@walterbo7687 first of all, a citizen already can purchase a tank if they want to. Second, you’re just being silly and emotional. And please, I’m curious how you define an “assault weapon”, we’re waiting for your fabulous response.
Click here for more news on the Supreme Court: ua-cam.com/play/PLEb3ThbkPrFbpTCZF8gtl9tHA0R-dhXlm.html
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
Thank god, I just bought a new T shirt. Unfortunately I forgot to sun tan lotion my bare arms. I got serious sun burns today 😂
cover up that arm
@@danjohnston9037 couldn’t resist a joke, bare arms 😂.......so glad it wasn’t read by a Grizzly with big paws.... Bear arms 🤣 have a great day, gotta smile and have a giggle life is way to short. 😊
You are abandoning 'a well regulated militia' portion of that constitutional right🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
@@202mahina its a non with standing clause the clause does not require a militia to own guns. its an example of a reason "the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. it doesnt say the rights of a well regulated militia. the rights is to the people. read the federalist papers its spells it out more clearly. regulated in 1791 ment to make regular not what regulated means today. bad faith argument you lose.
This is great news and a great win for us gunowners and the 2nd amendment shall not be infringed
sad days for these woke liberal, lol
As a fellow gun owner i approve this comment
@NoB.S you spelled conquerors wrong
@@Adameichenauer This
A law abiding citizen should be able to carry a gun anywhere. The law abiding part implies that you will never see it unless it is needed.
Try going to the Supreme Court with it !
An armed society is a polite society. We have talked about the slippery slope and death by a thousand cuts for to long. No gun control means a free population.
If you trade your freedoms for security you will soon find out that you have neither. Historically, people have always voted their freedoms away and will continue to do so. 14 Republicans are traitors and should not be relelected.
@@thedustyhead"shall not be infringed"
@@JCSJesusChristSaves An armed Society is a scared Society not a polite Society don't confuse the two . You have the same old tired BS argument ! You go to the two extremes and completely ignore the giant Canyon in between them . ... Today's NRA is nothing like the NRA that I knew growing up . Today's NRA are just pimps for gun manufacturers ! They show no concern about gun safety or education , instead they just deal through fear-mongering .
@@ronaldrenegade8519 The end of what, criminals running around committing gun crimes with no worries about citizens protecting themselves or their families?
The Founding Fathers and the American people had just fought off a tyrannical government when the 2nd Amendment was placed in the Constitution. It is a deterrent against potential tyrants; therefore shall not be infringed.
Right On 👏👏
Its crazy how the tyrant supporters truly believe they are the good guys.
@@WilsonAutoworks
They are upset law abiding citizens can now protect themselves. They're brainwashed into believing that's a bad thing. The far left have shown to be the epitome of gullibility.
@@WilsonAutoworks - A constitution written over 246 years ago. The founding fathers would never have conceived the need or granted someone to use an AR-15
@@WilsonAutoworks the same people saying that we need to defund the police are also saying that you need them for protection. Their minds are so open that their brains fell out.
We need to bring back self defense in NY
These tyrants will do their best to put people behind bars for self defense.
Apparently criminals have more rights than normal hard working citizens.
What do you mean by “bring back self defense” ?
What does hard working have to do with anything? Well criminals now have the right to obtain a gun legally. Nothing is hindering them.
remember The laws won't effect the crime because they always had guns.
It will only effect people that want to Defend themselves from the criminals
That will effect the crime though bc people will be shooting back and stopping repeat offenders that’s why the mayor is so upset bc people only vote for her bc she needs the violence to get votes
This and that's the point and why exactly it's put into the constitution in the first place to protect us from harm and tyranny.
Word "bearing" means for an item to be carried on PERSON. A person can be anywhere.
Time place and manner will continue to be argued. Hopefully states will look to kansas.
@@RJGa me either, court buildings and other places where the government will want more control, will probably argue for time place and manner restrictions...(military installation, federal buildings etc, the government will have to assume the duty to protect occupants, same with private property that bars firearms). Idk we will see. I hope america quickly returns to their roots, fearing god, and his moral laws.
Exactly, "bear" = attach to your person, not to your home.
Including courthouses and boat ramps. Agree.
That's funny because I think you'll find you can't have a gun on you at a NRA convention when Trump and Pence are on stage or even at CPAC. I mean I thought everyone was safer when there are more guns around?
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State; the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." - Constitution
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
Amen 🙏🇺🇸
Murdock v Pennsylvania - no state may convert a liberty into a privilege, issue a license and issue a fee.
Madison v Murberry - in the event a state converts your right into a privilege, you can ignore the license and fee and engage in your right with impunity.
It’s sad that New York that the 2nd amendment was intended to defend Americans from governments like them.
So where’s the “well-regulated militia”?
There’s nothing well regulated about you idiots who are carrying. You’re also NOT a militia.
So you're asking yourself why?
Well, the SCOTUS has ruled twice that the police do not have to or obligated to save you from a violent crime. This is why everyone who can, needs to be armed because they aren't going to help you. Uvalde was a great representation and example of why we need arms to save ourselves and the people around us at all times.
So the police can STOP you from exercising your right to protect your family?!!! This is utterly ubsurd!!!
EXACTLY
That's not remotely why... it was %100 politically motivated. Had nothing to do with protecting people.
@@thewhomphlew absolutely. This new ruling will cause the deaths of more Americans.
Exactly... Safety is a matter of avoiding or altering that which is unsafe.. No one needs a cop for that.. And then for those that may feel the need for a cop.. what's the guarantee to having one if and when such "need" arrives 🤔 👀 ????
This is a big win for the people. Thank you for upholding the constitution as it was written.
Yeah... then they should make tanks and missiles launchers way more cheaper for self defence. I've the right to defend myself against someone carrying an assault rifle!!!
@@walterbo7687 “Assault” rifles for civilians that are full automatic are illegal. The term “assault rifle” has been falsely assigned to common sporting rifles such as the AR15 and AK47 which in civilian configuration are SEMI AUTOMATIC not FULL AUTOMATIC. It’s better to keep your thoughts to yourself and be thought a fool rather than expressing them and removing all doubt. You obviously have no clue what an “assault rifle” is.
@@walterbo7687 We can own a tank and and rocket launcher. However, your kind is scared of firearms, so there isnt ever any chance of you defending yourself from anything.
Now shut tf up
@@walterbo7687 You fascists are pathetic
@@recoveringnewyorker2243 Its a Weapon and as such People sould have the Right to use it? By this Theory the Bann is unconstitutional as well.
His Example still works, cause its a deliberat overexateration to hammer in the Point.
This Decition will lead to the Dead of many People. But carrying a Gun will not lead into more savety.
The Justices finally read the 2nd amendment.. they apparently had not before... It is a really simple read.
Read as a Subordinate clause.
Because a well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.
You are really stupid Fire Storm, NY has this strict standards since 1919. There is a strong argument against the 2nd amendment. You don't want people to shoot each bother over a car crash. NY is too densely populated
The justices are completely ignoring the 'well regulated militia' portion of the amendment!🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
@@202mahina there are no laws preventing it, just subversive fed ops destroying them all from the inside. Nothing for them to strike down. Would love to see the patriot act go next as under the 4th amendment.
I was really worried they’d come up with some lawyerspeaking excuse as to why it’s constitutional. This result makes me happy
As a Liberal I agree with the ruling. The constitution says you have the right to bear arms. What New York and other states had in place made it a privilege to have a gun instead of allowing it to be a intrinsic right. Current events aside, because the Supreme Court is about determining what is and isn't constitutional, I feel they made the right choice because the constitution says we have the right to bear arms. New York was like, 'you need a reason that we deem worthy for you to bear arms in public', that doesn't seems that constitutional to me.
If people want to control guns and make a change, that's the job of the government.
I salute you, much respect, its rare to see a liberal now a days respecting the constitution! I totally agree with 100%
Whats the problem with law abiding citizens carrying there guns the criminals do it every day!
It’s the job of constitutional amendment.
@@garyowen9044 which is the job of the government. They are the one who make amendments.
You are a Unicorn. 🤣
The Right of the PEOPLE to Keep and BEAR Arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! The government has NO AUTHORITY to restrict, regulate, or deny this Absolute, Inherent, Unalienable Right. Just as they cannot restrict the First Amendment, or the rest of the Bill of Rights. Our Inherent Rights are not dependent on the actions of criminals, the approval of government, or the misguided, self-righteous, and uninformed opinions of the masses.
It means that you cannot, ever, undermine the inalienable right of the law abiding citizens to carry a firearm for their self-protection, The criminals, who ignore gun control laws, can no longer commit there crimes with virtual impunity.
Any law maker or official that tries to undermine this ruling will be shut down in court and ultimately challenged nationwide. Talking about how to get around the supreme court ruling is just stupid.
if it were me.. I would ban concealed weapons outright and make it a felony.. if you want to play cowboy then strap on your holster.. concealing weapons is not a right.. bear it proudly
@@voiceofreason7558 well it's not up to you so get over it
@@voiceofreason7558 Yeah just let the criminals know exactly who's safe to rob or assault. Brilliant!!
@@voiceofreason7558 no
@@goblin103187 it's more about showing society who the gun nuts are.. because those people are the most dangerous people in America
I do not understand why people are concerned about law abiding citizens carrying but not criminals.
My ex criminal BF who grew up in a gang neighborhood refused to own a gun because he said it was too easy to use it when he got angry at someone. He didn't want to end up in prison for life.
@Democrats getting smoked in November He had anger issues like a lot of "normal" people. Many of the rest of the people he knew owned guns. He didn't want to end up in prison like many of them did.
Good, law abiding citizens have a right to carry firearms to protect to themselves. God bless Clarence Thomas.
The goat
Clarence is a good Black man.
Is it too early to nominate him for Sainthood?
None of NY gun laws protect anybody! Huge win for the 2nd Ad and 14thAd.. This is a right! Bear arms shall not be infringed!!👍👍👍
Supreme Court Justice Samuel alito made reference to the New York gun laws in the supreme Court opinion that it did nothing to prevent the Buffalo New York shooting.
Only la cosa nostra and the organized criminals is all the BS NY law protected
Shall not be Infringed!! I can see the light at the end of the tunnel here in NJ
Roe v Wade is next 🇺🇸🙏✝️
Same here resident of New Jermany and Comrade Murphy and Bathroom Booker are having meltdowns 😂😂😂
The New York people need this! Have you seen the crooks there?
Exactly
Law abiding citizens need to strap up and protect themselves from criminals period!
Give them Jobs and dignity and they dont need beeing Crooks.
Unfortunately they tend to be the politicians
this law means no more Special need reason for carry permit. Sensitive places will be the next fight. Also, this ruling suggests more strict scrutiny on lower courts deciding gun control bills like banning firearms example ar-15 or overturning them. Thats how i read it
"Sensitive places" obviously can mean ONLY those places where "no weapons allowed" can be ENFORCED. Such as on airline flights, and in courthouses.
yeah... and the sensative places will be struck down too... except for federal buildings.. I cant wait.
So all of Manhattan will be a “sensitive place or what?
@@adamlynch9153 No...the rich whites want the rights that were especially really intended for only them anyway.
@@adamlynch9153 No, but I’m thinking they are going to try to make it as hard as they can and most likely going to see another lawsuit in the future about this
Why do we even need a permit. To gain permission to carry ?
We dont in Texas, and in 24 other States
You don't. They have just made you believe and act like you do. Its Pavlov's Dog all over again. They have conditioned most people to behave they way they want. Break the conditioning. Walk with God and this world can not stop you.
@@JCSJesusChristSaves It's likely thousands that were caught carrying a hand gun with no permit and had to do 3 - 5 years in jail.
@@STOPPOLICECORRUPTION Unless those thousands actually USED their guns to commit a crime, they are being ILLEGALLY imprisoned! Mere possession of a firearm should never be a crime, period! We should not be required to have a license, permit, whatever, to LAWFULLY own and carry the defensive weapons of our choice, openly or concealed!
I think the opinion address much more than just carry and scrutiny concerns. Thomas clearly states on page 19 of his opinion that the 2nd amendment applies to all modern firearms as well.
@Michael Douglas Whitted Technology changes. Rights don’t.
@Michael Douglas Whitted They never thought a cell phone would exist, does that mean we should allow searches of our cell phones without warrants?
@Michael Douglas Whitted actually the weapons they were speaking about were the military "high powered " weapons of that day.
A hunting rifle is actually more of a military weapon than the AR15
@Michael Douglas Whitted Funny. You don't give the Founders credit for the technological advances that were occurring in their very lifetimes. Look up the Puckle gun.
And semi-auto rifles came into being in 1885 -- over 135 years ago, just 111 years after they declaration independence from England.
There is never a real discussion about keeping criminals from having guns it's always about limiting citizens to have guns
Shall not be infringed! It’s about time now to abolish the NFA and the ATF
"not an absolute right" lmao the second amendment is literally an absolute right. "shall NOT be infringed"
It’s not an absolute right. Nothing is an absolute right. You can still have gun control/restrictions like background checks, restrictions for mental health’s conditions or criminal history, and for the type of gun.
@@likelovetothelost no it is an absolute right and these rules and regulations are unconstitutional. No other amendment has these arbitrary regulations. Would you be ok with the 19th amendment being treated the same? Women can only vote in some elections and only if they have no mental illness?
All you are doing is pushing for more and more government control. Literally just slow creeping gun control until the only people who can feasibly own one is the guards hired to protect the rich elites.
@@likelovetothelost constitutionally, no….
240 years ago, The United States did not have a standing Army, so our founding fathers included the 2nd Amendment. For what reason? Well, it’s the first few words in the Amendment.
👇🏼
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
After the bombing of Pearl Harbor Admiral Isoruku Yamamoto said “We cannot invade the US mainland. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.“
"Regulated" was the word chosen to imply that the Citizens should be proficient in the handling and use of their arms. NOT "Regulated" by the Government as to limit the use of said arms.The Constitution was put in place to protect the Citizens from the Government, Not to protect the Government from the Citizens.
To interpret the Constitution you must remember to use the language of the day in which it was written.
Part of the reason for the 2nd was to provide for defense against an outside aggressor; but that was only PART of the reason. There is a reason they put the word "free" in from of "State": sometimes the State itself can be the enemy of freedom. In such a case, the 2nd provides the ability of the people to defend their freedoms against a tyrannical State.
@@recoveringnewyorker2243 Don't forget the over million American privately owned firearms send to the United Kingdom during the early days of world war II. After the disaster of Dunkirk, the British home guard was handing out sharpen rebar and try to build an many sten as possible out of plumbing parts.
The old tired “militia is the national guard” argument. I counter with the “unorganized militia” found in federal law.
10 U.S. Code § 246 - Militia
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are-
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Oh happy day! This is a good decision for the rights of citizens. Self defense IS a legitimate reason to carry a firearm.
About time the Supreme Court did the right thing 👍🏾👍🏾
Hip hip hurray!
Gun laws don't stop criminals from getting guns it just restricts citizens from protecting themselves
The founders didn't specify place where you can carry because if they thought of one they would have put it in there. Not having one in the right means citizens can carry anywhere.
Exactly. There is no legal basis for the words "sensitive places". They don't exist. They need to be sued.
These politicians live in a fantasy world. Imagine if they tried to take away their bodyguards ability to carry!
There is nothing to interpret!!!! The second amendment is ABSOLUTELY clear.
Great news! Thank God we have the great CONSTITUTION!
🙏🇺🇸
This is a big win! Maryland as well has some bs laws surrounding being approved for a ccw
As a MD citizen, this ruling is great. Now we'll see what further roadblocks they impose.
@@rjpg yup… turning 21 soon … and I hope that it gets easier for the good people out there to exercise their rights!
How about keeping guns out of criminals hands and not law abiding citizens
Good for the supreme court
If someone is going to conceal a weapon and commit a crime, they aren’t caring about the law and location. Why would someone go through all the work of providing fingerprints, waiting for a license and do the mandatory training to just commit a crime . This law targets people that want to protect themselves against those that want to do harm for not reason. There’s no interpreting the 2nd amendment. It was written that way on purpose. Protecting your life doesn’t only stop at home
Bingo.
Thats also why every states ccw permit should be valid in every other state. I take a background check to obtain it, two actually, and yet i still cannot carry in california. Thats bogus. All that tells me, is they dont trust their own background checks, ironically the same ones who keep letting known mentally unstable people get guns...... hmmmmm
The problem is people think carrying a gun makes them a man it's pathetic and that they have the right to silence those they don't agree with
If your Country is so messed up you have to carry a Gun around then you got a Problem.
Second, its easy to spot a Shooter. You know the Guys who are more numberous then Days. But if its legal to walk around whit your Machinegun, no one can stop you until you open Fire.
More Guns create more Problems, thats a fact. Amfact backed up by Intelligence.
How many Shootings occured in America this Year. How many occured in Afghanistan? Its less then 2% last time I checked.
@@Sunaki1000 oh shut tf up. Being able to legally carry a gun because one chooses to isnt a big deal. You people need to get over yourselves before we do it for you.
"To keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
The Supreme court is preparing to challenge gun free zones,
Gun free zones are targets for criminals and get law-abiding citizens killed
I hate that it has come to this. However, if the teacher(s) had been armed, how many more children in that room would be alive now.
the 2nd amendment is an absolute RIGHT protection by the Constitution. The problem is that State Statues conflix with the Constitution and this is why the supremacy clause exist.
Our right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon. What about that is not clear?
Well the fact that 96 percent of the population wants background checks makes it pretty clear we do want it infringed. We don't want criminals to have guns but here you are arguing for them to have it. You people deserve to be personally affected by this. Your concealed carry won't protect your kids when they're at a public pool and your back is turned. It won't protect you in a dark movie theater when someone starts firing at you and you can't see them. It won't protect you on a street when you walk past a coffee shop and psychos bullets fly though a window and hit you in the head. It also won't protect you when you pull it out and you mistakenly shoot an innocent bystander while trying to play Rambo. It's an irrefutable fact that permits decrease gun crimes. This is the most egregious miscarriage of law in the name of profit through politics I have ever seen in my relatively long life. I'm ashamed and apalled at what this country is becoming. Cowards who need to exist in a world of feel good tough guy buzzwords and catch phrases and Boogeymen are fueling the Republican party. They've turned their back on all senses of decency logic or true patriotism. Patriotism is being willing to die to protect your fellow countrymen not killing your fellow countrymen to protect yourself.
The NYC police can’t keep residents safe, so at least now they’ll be able to protect themselves. Same for CA, hopefully.
The second amendment is an absolute right .
Dementia Joe wouldn't know that.
When bad people know good people might carry, bad people will be more restrained in their criminal activities.
Finally law abiding citizens in those states could legally concealed carry. 2A All the way!
They still need to acquire a permit. This only means that they can not be refused permits like New York was doing. The liberals will find a way around the laws like they always do. They'll tie people up for years with red tape or some other BS.
Sadly lots of business owners and shopping places still ban guns, and lots of people surely dont feel comfortable seeing people carrying around guns when they dont know that the intention is or plan is. Times have changed and with demonic teens and people having easy access to semi-automatic weapons we will see more shootings in schools and public places.
Lol
Imagine preventing law abiding citizens from carrying a weapon for protection; mean while criminals have endless acces to weapons
People were already going to times square with concealed guns, it was just limited to people with the right political connections or who had enough money to get someone to sign off on getting the permit.
The law was keeping guns out of the good guys hands and doing nothing to take them from the bad guys
Defunding the police
is a more than sufficient
reason to keep the
2nd Amendment!
The criminals were carrying regardless, so why not allow more law abiding citizens to carry…
Really love when the 'lawyer' Jessica says, "It doesn't mean the the 2nd Amendment is an absolute right." ...Oh, really. You do know what "shall not be infringed" means, right?
Breyer's comment and everyone looking at shootings in today's society actually proves the need for every law abiding citizen to have the ability to defend themselves against a firearm wielding attacker WITH a their own firearm!
Ah, semantics. The trump card of every 4th grader who's been backed into the logical corner.
Take a look at Texas, if that were to happen here in CA we’d have to result to fending for our children given the defunding of the police. I’m not saying we should all play Cop but how do you stop a bad guy with a gun? Place more good guys with guns on the streets, bet people won’t initiate a fight as much as they do now.
@@mariolanderosgarcia5373 exactly criminals will think twice now.
The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Thank you for upholding it.
Imagine having to spend 100k+ on a degree just to “understand” the constitution that’s written in plain English 🤣💀. It’s sad these people are considered intellectuals
Lol good old ed-juma-cation…damn shame!
You sound so dum, NY has these strict rules since 1919. NY is too crowded and dense. You cannot have everyone walking with guns in a crowded area. The jury has a 6/9 majority, these right wing judges don't care about NY
Ummmm.... you DO need to understand the Bill of Rights within the context of the time they were written. Why? Because human rights are universal and timeless, and they do not belong to governments -- they belong to everyone!
We're taking our rights back
Does this ruling mean CA residents can concealed carry effective immediately?
No. The court has decided that a state can not mandate a special reason for someone to conceal carrying a weapon. States can and will still require people to apply for a permit. It's just they can't deny you. Unless you're a felon or mentally ill.
This was actually a really good piece. It just gave the facts. The anchors didn’t show any real bias and neither did the guests. They explained the methods used by the court and how it may impact things going further. Well done CBS.
They concentrate on the dissent. Bias. Thank goodness for the Supreme Court. These laws have to be stripped away. Sue the politicians into submission.
I was thinking the same thing. Very well done.
Elise, a Republican, supports the ruling.
The governor of New York, a democrat, disagrees with the ruling.
This country is divided with respect to party lines. What a damn shame!
The demonicrat Governor Newsom disagrees also.
Yes yes yes Yes Now yorkers can FIGHT BACK AGAINST PERPS
The 2nd Amendment is a absolute right and shall not be infringed
Arms carry is legal as per constitution so if u want to change ,then change constitution
The special need was if you were rich, famous, or had a connection to the judge
With this ruling I'm getting my first gun for protection and gonna get my carry permit
2A forever!!!
look at all the fascists crying now. long live the Constitutional Republic 🇺🇸⚔️🦅
What part of "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" do you people NOT understand????
If NYS did feel the need to violate there citizens constitutional rights they would not be in this situation... If they were more concerned about criminals and keeping guns away from criminals instead of trying to violate law-abiding citizens this State might be a better place to live but they spend more time worrying about criminals and criminals rights... A criminal is not going to worry about the fact if he has a high capacity magazine has gone he's going to commit a crime using the weapon... And all the recent laws that are Governor has passed are going to end up the same way as being unconstitutional especially the red flag law... The problem is politician doesn't matter what party they come from Republican or Democrat they spend their lives as being professional politicians trying to take away mine and you are right because they know what's better my thinking is that we need to take away what's the most important thing to them we need to institute term limits on the state and national level.. there's no reason in the world for somebody to be a professional politician their whole life an example is Chuck Schumer when was the last time that guy realized what it's like to be an average everyday person? He has always perks always freebies he's out of touch with reality the guy who's never had a real job and his whole life..
These people clearly can’t read! The second literally is the only amendment that says shall not be infringed it’s absolute
If you work a 12 hr shift and have a 1 hr commute each way the majority of your day is outside the home. So these laws say that you can't protect yourself the majority of the time if you happen to work alot or travel alot for work. Truckers, salesmen, etc stay away from home for days at a time........
In other words liberal justices dont analyze the constitution.. they issue their own opinions.. activists not judges
"Gun laws are double-edged swords drenched in the blood of good intentions."
Alexander Tran
While true, it also prevents extreme cases of government take over of its people in cases such Mao(40 million), Stalin(23 million) and Hitler(17 million).
Who tf is Alexander Tran?
Yes sir it is!! & we love it. Land of the free & home of the brave because our freedom is dangerous.
This country was not meant for the faint hearted or for cowards. More guns plzzz 🇺🇸⚔️🦅
@@DHG-01 Sounds like a made-up name.
Respect our constitution
Now when a criminal commits an armed robbery, they have to deal with armed victims and nearby armed spectators, chances are the armed suspect will be shot by their victims.
And what is the fallout? The collateral damage? Too many innocent bystanders are being struck and killed by gunfire.
@@laurataylornyc9 It’s better than NOT being able to respond. Crossfire is a definite consideration. However, I believe most law abiding concealed carry holders will obtain training to deal with bad situation‘s. Besides the criminals will now think twice before committing a crime in the first place.
@@recoveringnewyorker2243 Clearly you are not currently living in New York City
@@laurataylornyc9 You really don't want law abiding citizens to be disarmed. You think you do, but you don't because then it's completely one-sided, and it ain't our side with the upper hand.
@@Smasho8000 You think you know what I want? REALLY? Get a grip! Read the law, which doesn’t disarm anyone. Try to understand why it was but into effect for the past 100 years. Alternatively, go for a walk at night in Harlem or ride the subway to the South Bronx or South Ozone Park and test your delusional theory.
Change penalty on law breakers,no plea bargaining , no appeals , mandatory sentences, Death penalty required in gun violence cases , limited appeals,
Thank you SCOTUS
Thank God for the US Constitution & SCOTUS who made the decision to uphold the US Constitution.
@@itsyooboii1464 True True. 🇺🇸🦅
@@bay5005
They say God doesn't exist & prayer don't work but look at us now. Roe v Wade is next.
God bless the United States of America 🇺🇸🙏✝️
The second amendments doesn’t say the right to bear arms in the house but just the right to bear arms. Which translate in it out of the home. These dam politicians these days Interpretate the constitution like it’s a Enigma. It’s not hard to understand what it says for the second amendment.
Nothing new here for anyone who knows what the words "to keep and bear mean". This was long overdue and our right to self-defense does not end at our front door!
What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?
The big story here is the word bear means you do not need to show a special need to protect yourself in the same way a wealthy or famous individual can carry.
There is no reason to look at modern reasons, the fact that you have no right to tell me my rights. The Constitution is clear on this subject.
I applaud the courage of SCOTUS to stand up to a heated environment based on current events. I also condemn them for their utter ignorance of improperly applying historical standards. We should aspire to be more civilized than we were two centuries ago.
Roe v Wade is next 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Deal with it the Supreme court has ruled and that's that. You can't do anything about it.
Its Trumps Supream court no longer is it the US supream court.
The reasons for the second amendment are just as valid today as they were when they were written. Same as the first amendment. Before the invention of the internet or phone.
Actually they aren't because the second amendment was clearly meant for the defense of the country and that was when we didn't have a standing army and now that we do it's really irrelevant.
People keep acting like the founding fathers received the Constitution from on high when in reality it's just a bunch of Patchwork compromises made by primitive people who owned slaves and likely most of them thought the Earth was the center of the universe
Law abiding citizens are allowed to carry firearms. I love the sad faces that these liberal newscasters put on for us.
this is exactly what ive been saying. police cant be everywhere. we the citizens should be able to protect ourselves for the criminals.
Sadly, even when police are there not everyone will be treated equal; imagine a black young father with a gun walking around, the police will shoot him just for that, than may say oops thought he was the criminal, imagine everyone with guns and if there is a shooter the police will have a hard time knowing which is the shooter and which is the victim. I dont like guns at all, but think semi-automatic should not be sold to anyone unless they are in the Military or police. Sorry but not everyone is out to deer hunt. Too many road rages out there and paranoid people plus crazy wicked teens like the Tops and Uvalde and Columbine ones who just feel like killing; and have no criminal history. The greedy NRA only care about themselves as do the politicians who support them; why? Well they never had to bury their own kids, since thier kids go to private schools, have body guards and have the best schools with security. They dont give a hoot about anyones kids or granma who happens to just go grocery shopping and gets killed by a nut, whoes bigot daddy just gives them the gun.
If you disagree with the Court when are we getting Voter ID Permits?
Careful, you'll make their heads explode.
Not an absolute right! It's the only amendment that reads "Shall not be infringed"
It is an absolute right.
Thank God
Thank the Supreme Court 👍🏾👍🏾
The second amendment is an absolute right lol
Good move in the right direction
Happy birthday Justice Thomas. May God bless you sir.
Yeah... then they should make tanks and missiles launchers way more cheaper for self defence. I've the right to defend myself against someone carrying an assault rifle!!!
@@walterbo7687 Expressing those uneducated thoughts again? You are exposing yourself as a fool.
@@walterbo7687 Again, those are MUNITIONS not Arms. Thank god the Supreme Court protects us from your stupidity.
19 million people, yet only 1% of them are licensed to concealed carry (CC). This equates to around 196,000 licenses issued as of August 2021.
Great first steps in the right direction.
Yeah... then they should make tanks and missiles launchers way more cheaper for self defence. I've the right to defend myself against someone carrying an assault rifle!!!
@@walterbo7687 Sing a new song. You are exposing yourself as a fool!
@@walterbo7687
Save your breathe, roe v Wade is next 🇺🇸🇲🇽🇺🇸🇲🇽 God Bless America 🙏✝️
@@walterbo7687 what is an assault rifle?
@@walterbo7687 first of all, a citizen already can purchase a tank if they want to. Second, you’re just being silly and emotional. And please, I’m curious how you define an “assault weapon”, we’re waiting for your fabulous response.
Law uphold
America Gun Happy Country 🌍
More guns more mass shootings 🤷🏾♂️
We won’t be invaded
@@cooldudecs
From within our from the outside
“SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED” GOD BLESS AMERICA.
Amen
2A stands strong! Very good day!
Breuer doesn't understand that the vast majority of killers are being done with illegal guns.