народ, подскажите!!!! Хочу оформить лайсенс на ношение оружия....Какой закон насчет этого в Иллинойс, можно ли носить при себе? Я сама девушка...какое оружие посоветуете для меня, ну так на всякий случай.....что то не очень большое, а то со мной сегодня такой случай приключился ....правда Бог миловал.... а то не-знаю что могло бы произойти....страшно стало очень, вот я и поняла что надо что то предпринимать, а то мало ли...

А вот и *обьяснения* пошли.......патом будет *груп хаг* и как всегда напоследок заявление о том што он *пошутил*...........фу, слизняк мерзкий..........

ню-ню....

Мда... А потом Пихтольман скажет что это я за ним ношусь по всем темам как "пинчер мокрожопый"...

смешно смотреть когда люди покупают большие дома в кредит платя бешенные мортаге паыментс, и езжут на машинах которым 15-20 лет уже. (ц)

ещо смешнее выглядят всякие *вонабис* живущие в сьёмных апартментах с тараканами и платящие за машину по штуке в месяц

супер-дупер не равноценно *получше*, а *хреновенький* не равноценно *похуже*

гр.

я за ним ношусь по всем темам как ъпинчер мокрожопыйъ...(ц)

Деда, а у тебя прогресс в дрессировке етого... он уже знает как его зовут....

Скоро будет лапу давать и тапки приносить

размечтался. кусать тебя будет, а не тапки приносить

гр.

кусать тебя будет, а не тапки приносить(ц)

Ниче, дед ему намордник купит....

People have the right not just to keep but BEAR arms. Any laws that unconditionally prohibit people to bear arms are in violation of the Second Amendment.

Some day we will return constituionality to this country, but it will not be pretty...

Amen to that, brother...

>>>People have the right not just to keep but BEAR arms

not people, but a well regulated militia
the second amendment is subject to interpretation

gr.

the second amendment is subject to interpretation (c)

Really??? Says who?

not people, but a well regulated militia (c)

and that *well regulated militia* consists of robots, I suppose

>>>Really??? Says who?

specialists.
there were multiple lawsuits regarding this matter

gr.

specialists (c)
Let me guess, they were all liberals.........coincidently of course.

In the majority opinion in the case of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), Justice Antonin Scalia wrote concerning the entirety of the elements of the Second Amendment; "We find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation." However, Scalia also continued, "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose." (c)

You can also move to another state

gr.

We find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation However, Scalia also continued, "Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose."(c)

Yeah, but confrontation is very probable when you are on the street, especially where there is a known high crime rate area. Therefore, it gives you the right to carry a weapon to protect your self.

Grazhdanka,

Sure, it is not unlimited- that's why I said if the statute UNCONDITIONALLY prohibits bearing arms, it's unconstitutional. I am willing to put up with restrictions on convicted violent criminals and mentally ill, but the problem is that the statutes, like in Illinos, are prohibiting bearing arms PERIOD.

There are limitations to freedom of speech too, and I accept that- but can they TOTALLY prohibit free speech? Hell, no! Similarly, they can't totally ban bearing arms.

Also, if you think it is the MILITIA's right to keep and bear arms- I suggest you pull out your Constitution and reread the Second Amendment.

>>>if you think it is the MILITIA's right to keep and bear arms- I suggest you pull out your Constitution and reread the Second 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"

in my opinion, this amendment is redundant since it was written in a different time when there was no police as it is today

gr.

this amendment is redundant since it was written in a different time when there was no police as it is today (c)

and what if the police will be used against people? it happened many times before........hell, it happens every single day! then what?

are you talking about yourself again? sorry, that's not a good example
and btw, even in states that allow to bear arms, you are not allowed to use it against the police

gr.

you are not allowed to use it against the police (c)

what if they are trying to brack in without court order, in plain clouth. Sure I can shoot those MTFers

Ded, forget about using guns. You can't even use your camera recording cops performing their duty.

>>What if they are trying to brack in without court order, in plain clouth. Sure I can shoot those MTFers.

Haven't you heard about Jose Guerena's case?

Grazhdanka, thank you for pasting the quote from the 2nd Amendment. Now you see, that it's the right of the people, not the militia???

And, if you believe, the amendment is "redundant"- GUESS WHAT? The Constitution provides 2 ways of who any provision of the Constitution can be changed! So let them change it or even delete it! But don't tell me it's redundant- while it is still in there- it's the law of the freaking land!!!!

I did not mean to yell, but 8 cups of coffee had to manifest themselves somehow....

sorry- it's not "who any provision", but "how any provision can be changed"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kassP7zI0qc у большинства ментов невпорядке с головой

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-friends-weekend/index.html#/v/1059227738001/burglar-messes-with-wrong-dude/?playlist_id=163197?test=faces molodec parnishka