Fairfax County General :
Fairfax Underground
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
Welcome to Fairfax Underground, a project site designed to improve communication among residents of Fairfax County, VA. Feel free to post anything Northern Virginia residents would find interesting.
NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
NRA^ Not Really Americans
()
Date: April 29, 2020 07:19PM
The National Rifle Association's legal troubles have cost the powerful gun rights group $100 million, according to a recording of the group's board meeting obtained by NPR.
Hey Fairfax NRA employees, what is the truth?
.
Attachments:
Hey Fairfax NRA employees, what is the truth?
.
Attachments:
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
NinaLaw
()
Date: April 30, 2020 12:36AM
The truth is that the Second Amendment provides for the inalienable right to bear arms. Why you mad, bro? Loud noises, bright flashes, and preservation of life scare you? Grow a pair. The NRA is privately funded, and while you seem to think you can assign a monetary value to an individual’s right and/or an individual’s life, you can’t. You’re no better than anyone else, and you damn sure don’t get to decide in what manner other people are able to ensure their own right to life. Why don’t you make a minimal effort to pursue your right happiness and stop being such a miserable cunt.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
EEX4M
()
Date: April 30, 2020 01:08AM
Hey you ignorant shitbird, your infantile fascination with guns is impeding on my children's right to sit in their desks at school without worrying about being murdered.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
No longer NRA
()
Date: April 30, 2020 02:07AM
NinaLaw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> for the inalienable right to bear arms.
It does not give every person in the country the right to own whatever weapon they want and to take it wherever they want. We know this because the same people who approved the second amendment were passing and enforcing laws regulating firearm ownership and use. We know this because the Supreme Court in Heller, in an opinion drafted by Scalia, said so.
Scalia and the Court did not overturn its previous holding in Miller upholding restrictions on firearm ownership and possession. Scalia also wrote in Heller "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." He also stated "Nor, correspondingly, does our analysis suggest the invalidity of laws regulating the storage of firearms to prevent accidents." In his summary he stated "The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns...."
The right to possess reasonably effective weapons for self defense in the home and under certain circumstances to carry them for personal defense outside the home, a position which most Americans including a substantial number on the left support, was conceded in most of the country even before Heller was filed. That isn't what the NRA has been fighting for in recent years. It nominally has been fighting for a more extreme interpretation of the Second Amendment. In reality though it has been fighting to retain power.
They do have a decent museum though.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> for the inalienable right to bear arms.
It does not give every person in the country the right to own whatever weapon they want and to take it wherever they want. We know this because the same people who approved the second amendment were passing and enforcing laws regulating firearm ownership and use. We know this because the Supreme Court in Heller, in an opinion drafted by Scalia, said so.
Scalia and the Court did not overturn its previous holding in Miller upholding restrictions on firearm ownership and possession. Scalia also wrote in Heller "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." He also stated "Nor, correspondingly, does our analysis suggest the invalidity of laws regulating the storage of firearms to prevent accidents." In his summary he stated "The Constitution leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns...."
The right to possess reasonably effective weapons for self defense in the home and under certain circumstances to carry them for personal defense outside the home, a position which most Americans including a substantial number on the left support, was conceded in most of the country even before Heller was filed. That isn't what the NRA has been fighting for in recent years. It nominally has been fighting for a more extreme interpretation of the Second Amendment. In reality though it has been fighting to retain power.
They do have a decent museum though.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
blew lagoon
()
Date: April 30, 2020 05:16AM
Hey It's the NRA!
Cowards gotta have someplace to cower.
Cowards gotta have someplace to cower.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
question???????
()
Date: April 30, 2020 01:01PM
NinaLaw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> for the inalienable right to bear arms.
Then why is the term "well regulated" in the Second Amendment?
-------------------------------------------------------
> The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> for the inalienable right to bear arms.
Then why is the term "well regulated" in the Second Amendment?
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Amend And Ratify Or GET OUT
()
Date: April 30, 2020 04:30PM
>Hey you ignorant shitbird, your infantile fascination with guns is impeding on my children's right to sit in their desks at school without worrying about being murdered.
Your "feels" don't out weigh my US constitutional right to keep and bear arms to defend my life and my family's . An individual right protected by the second amendment within the Bill Of Rights confirmed by the US Supreme Court
Move to England or wherever the hell you came from if you cant follow the laws of the land , amend and ratify the constitution to suit your feels or STFU and get out
Your "feels" don't out weigh my US constitutional right to keep and bear arms to defend my life and my family's . An individual right protected by the second amendment within the Bill Of Rights confirmed by the US Supreme Court
Move to England or wherever the hell you came from if you cant follow the laws of the land , amend and ratify the constitution to suit your feels or STFU and get out
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Scalia Is Dead
()
Date: April 30, 2020 04:35PM
No assault weapon ban has come before the court and been heard , one will when RBG croaks and the gun bans declared unconstitutional with the same response the court gave in Heller and McDonald , regulate not ban when Trump places another Justice on the court who will uphold the constitution not make law from the bench as the (D) appointees do
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
WKNVC
()
Date: April 30, 2020 04:59PM
question??????? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NinaLaw Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> > for the inalienable right to bear arms.
>
> Then why is the term "well regulated" in the
> Second Amendment?
The guntards never quote that part.
-------------------------------------------------------
> NinaLaw Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> > for the inalienable right to bear arms.
>
> Then why is the term "well regulated" in the
> Second Amendment?
The guntards never quote that part.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Not Really Americans/NRA
()
Date: April 11, 2021 09:27AM
Not Really Americans/NRA
Is the NRA gone?
Is the NRA gone?
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
We Know The Real Truth
()
Date: April 11, 2021 03:41PM
Hey you ignorant shitbird, your infantile fascination with guns is impeding on my children's right to sit in their desks at school without worrying about being murdered.
By her own drugged libtard daddy high on weed and coke speeding to make another weed buy
By her own drugged libtard daddy high on weed and coke speeding to make another weed buy
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Sink Pisser
()
Date: April 11, 2021 04:23PM
WKNVC Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> question??????? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NinaLaw Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The truth is that the Second Amendment
> provides
> > > for the inalienable right to bear arms.
> >
> > Then why is the term "well regulated" in the
> > Second Amendment?
>
>
> The guntards never quote that part.
Because we shouldn't have to you stupid ass, but commie rat liberal fucksticks like yourself are too fucking dumb to figure it out on your own.
"Well-regulated in the 18th century tended to be something like well-organized, well-armed, well-disciplined," says Rakove. "It didn't mean 'regulation' in the sense that we use it now, in that it's not about the regulatory state. There's been nuance there. It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight."
In other words, it didn't mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather that the militia was prepared to do its duty.
-------------------------------------------------------
> question??????? Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NinaLaw Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > The truth is that the Second Amendment
> provides
> > > for the inalienable right to bear arms.
> >
> > Then why is the term "well regulated" in the
> > Second Amendment?
>
>
> The guntards never quote that part.
Because we shouldn't have to you stupid ass, but commie rat liberal fucksticks like yourself are too fucking dumb to figure it out on your own.
"Well-regulated in the 18th century tended to be something like well-organized, well-armed, well-disciplined," says Rakove. "It didn't mean 'regulation' in the sense that we use it now, in that it's not about the regulatory state. There's been nuance there. It means the militia was in an effective shape to fight."
In other words, it didn't mean the state was controlling the militia in a certain way, but rather that the militia was prepared to do its duty.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Shooting Straight Telling Truths
()
Date: April 11, 2021 04:57PM
How bad Democrats are for the US , that's well regulated enough for the founders
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
NRA\Not Really Americans
()
Date: April 11, 2021 05:03PM
^^^ Seems the russian troll bot translator is on the fritz today.
Better luck tomorrow
Better luck tomorrow
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Yep! russian troll bot
()
Date: April 20, 2021 09:43AM
What happened to the russian troll bot?
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Spirit of 1780
()
Date: April 20, 2021 12:02PM
Sink Pisser Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In other words, it didn't mean the state was
> controlling the militia in a certain way, but
> rather that the militia was prepared to do its
> duty.
That is not correct. It meant that the state was controlling the militia in a certain way. Anyone who looks at militia laws at the time of the Revolution knows that the state was dictating who could be armed, what weapons they must have and when and how they were to be trained. The expectation was not simply that "the people" turn out armed, but that "the right people" would turn out armed with the weapons needed and be prepared to fight in the manner needed.
The Second Amendment isn't simply a response to the argument over the virtue of an armed v. an unarmed population. It is a response to the argument over whether the freedom of America should be left to the professional, national army or whether the states and localities should have independent resources of defense.
-------------------------------------------------------
> In other words, it didn't mean the state was
> controlling the militia in a certain way, but
> rather that the militia was prepared to do its
> duty.
That is not correct. It meant that the state was controlling the militia in a certain way. Anyone who looks at militia laws at the time of the Revolution knows that the state was dictating who could be armed, what weapons they must have and when and how they were to be trained. The expectation was not simply that "the people" turn out armed, but that "the right people" would turn out armed with the weapons needed and be prepared to fight in the manner needed.
The Second Amendment isn't simply a response to the argument over the virtue of an armed v. an unarmed population. It is a response to the argument over whether the freedom of America should be left to the professional, national army or whether the states and localities should have independent resources of defense.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Fake News!
()
Date: April 20, 2021 12:17PM
^ Fake News!
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Great News!
()
Date: April 24, 2021 04:16PM
NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End Gun-Rights Group
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
So VERRRRY Sorry Communists
()
Date: April 24, 2021 11:22PM
Then why is the term "well regulated" in the
> Second Amendment?
You talking about militia's which the high court has decided has no bearing on the individual right to keep and bear arms . In any event there is the "unorganized militia of the US" , look it up if you want to see who that is
Receivership ??
The NRA will be replaced by grass roots organizations like The Virginia Defense League if it goes south , all over the USA which will grow vastly larger
> Second Amendment?
You talking about militia's which the high court has decided has no bearing on the individual right to keep and bear arms . In any event there is the "unorganized militia of the US" , look it up if you want to see who that is
Receivership ??
The NRA will be replaced by grass roots organizations like The Virginia Defense League if it goes south , all over the USA which will grow vastly larger
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Black Caulk
()
Date: April 25, 2021 12:26AM
NinaLaw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> for the inalienable right to bear arms. Why you
> mad, bro? Loud noises, bright flashes, and
> preservation of life scare you? Grow a pair. The
> NRA is privately funded, and while you seem to
> think you can assign a monetary value to an
> individual’s right and/or an individual’s
> life, you can’t. You’re no better than anyone
> else, and you damn sure don’t get to decide in
> what manner other people are able to ensure their
> own right to life. Why don’t you make a minimal
> effort to pursue your right happiness and stop
> being such a miserable cunt.
“ inalienable right ” my ass. If an Amendment can be added, it can be taken away. You fucking incels don’t need guns any more than you need condoms.
-------------------------------------------------------
> The truth is that the Second Amendment provides
> for the inalienable right to bear arms. Why you
> mad, bro? Loud noises, bright flashes, and
> preservation of life scare you? Grow a pair. The
> NRA is privately funded, and while you seem to
> think you can assign a monetary value to an
> individual’s right and/or an individual’s
> life, you can’t. You’re no better than anyone
> else, and you damn sure don’t get to decide in
> what manner other people are able to ensure their
> own right to life. Why don’t you make a minimal
> effort to pursue your right happiness and stop
> being such a miserable cunt.
“ inalienable right ” my ass. If an Amendment can be added, it can be taken away. You fucking incels don’t need guns any more than you need condoms.
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
NRA 2 russia
()
Date: April 27, 2021 05:05AM
Great News! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> Gun-Rights Group
Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
-------------------------------------------------------
> NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> Gun-Rights Group
Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
Not Really Americans/NRA!
()
Date: May 01, 2021 02:30PM
NRA 2 russia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great News! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> > Gun-Rights Group
>
> Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
Yeah, the NRA would love russia just like they love russian $$$
-------------------------------------------------------
> Great News! Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> > Gun-Rights Group
>
> Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
Yeah, the NRA would love russia just like they love russian $$$
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
NRA laundered russian money
()
Date: May 04, 2021 08:39AM
Not Really Americans/NRA! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NRA 2 russia Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > Great News! Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
> > > NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> > > Gun-Rights Group
> >
> > Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
>
> Yeah, the NRA would love russia just like they
> love russian $$$
This Checks Out!
-------------------------------------------------------
> NRA 2 russia Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > Great News! Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
> > > NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> > > Gun-Rights Group
> >
> > Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
>
> Yeah, the NRA would love russia just like they
> love russian $$$
This Checks Out!
Re: NRA's Legal Troubles Cost Upwards Of $100 Million
Posted by:
This Still Checks Out!
()
Date: May 05, 2021 07:46AM
Not Really Americans/NRA! Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> NRA 2 russia Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > Great News! Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
> > > NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> > > Gun-Rights Group
> >
> > Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
>
> Yeah, the NRA would love russia just like they
> love russian $$$
This Still Checks Out!
-------------------------------------------------------
> NRA 2 russia Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> > Great News! Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
> > > NRA Board Member Says Receivership Would End
> > > Gun-Rights Group
> >
> > Perhaps the NRA can move to russia
>
> Yeah, the NRA would love russia just like they
> love russian $$$
This Still Checks Out!