I just want to remind gun supporters of Trumps Stance on guns

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00148-020-00820-3

We find no evidence that worsening economic conditions reduced electoral support for Trump. The 2SLS estimates show evidence that COVID-19 cases affect positively voters’ mobilization, helping Biden win the presidency.

At least two explanations are consistent with these findings. First, voters may have electorally sanctioned Trump for how he handled the pandemic, which was at odds with most major countries, and widely criticized. This explanation is consistent with a retrospective voting approach (Fiorina 1981; Fearon 1999; Norpoth 2001), in which voters sanction incumbents for their handling of negative shocks. Second, some voters may have switched from Trump to Biden due to changes in preferences triggered by the pandemic

 

What you saw was Trump flail so hard, pre and during the pandemic, on matters of policy, of character, of basic competency, that enough voters turned out for Biden to win.
There isn't any way to analyze how people would've felt without a tad less than a years worth of bullshit pre election, but Trump had well and truly **** the bed by his first year in office and it only compounded upon itself the longer he held the office..

 

Yes. Everyone is an ARMs grabber to some extent. As most all are fine with certain infringements.
The $64 million question is, where's each person's infringement limit.

 

there are those who understand the second amendment and those who piss on it. Those who admit that the government does not violate the second amendment by banning nukes, rockets, grenades, mines, mortars or cannon are not pissing on the constitution. Those who think the government should ban firearms are.

 

you never answered my question-who would you rather have appointing the next 2-3 supreme court justices

Trump
Biden

 

Life is not a binary solution set. Neither is voting. I'd prefer neither, they're equally odious though for unique reasons each.

 

I'd bet 98 out of 100 serious gun rights activists prefer Trump appointments over Biden appointments

 

That's your line in the sand.
But there are infringements to owning them.

 

and many are blatantly unconstitutional. one does not get to justify one's support of unconstitutional infringements by yapping that others support constitutional restrictions

 

Ye olde no true scotsman's fallacy? Really? Is that where you want to be when Jesus comes back friend?

 

Turtle this is just silly. You have literally admitted in arguments with me that yes they are infringing but they'll only give you so much so you'll take it.
Here you are with Dairy denying that you have drawn a line short of the logical extension of the announced rule.

Just own your position man. Does holding it disturb you so? Maybe think about altering it if it does.

 

tenth amendment vs second counselor

 

I'm agnostic: religious arguments have no impact with me

 

Its a reference to the movie "Joe Dirt" friend.

Its a joke.

 

never saw that

 

Linear time friend: Guess what happens when you add the 14th amendment and incorporation?

 

you have a conflict between traditional police powers vs the second because when the second was created, the founders knew that the federal government had zero proper gun control powers concerning private citizens acting in their own sovereign states in a private capacity. Your attitude is that states can no longer engage in traditional police powers in any form concerning the keeping and bearing of firearms is not a winning argument.

 

My attitude is that the 2nd amendment has been incorporated as against the states by a duly passed Constitutional Amendment. That amendment changes the paradigm from the one you describe to the one I describe.
That's the purpose of an amendment, to change the Constitution.
Your attitude is that an amendment has no effect. That's plainly absurd.

 

and yet you cannot find me a single court that will

1) strike down laws preventing people from bearing arms in jails, courthouses, or past the security zones in airports

2) allowing dangerous felons to keep and bear arms or allow minors to buy firearms

 

1) See Bruen, there are analogs for jails, courthouses and analogous places.
This is a strawman argument you have created from whole cloth which has nothing to do with any position I have advanced.
2) Uh fella you understand those felon cases are already working their ways through the bowels of the Court? RE: Minors: Minors have all sorts of rights limited prior to majority, come off it.
3) more to the point, the text says and means what is says and means. That's regardless of whether the Supremes pontificate on it.
4) Still further: Courts can make a decision plainly at odds with the Constitution, and their fiat doesn't change anything. There is a reason the Court subsists on respect for its rulings only.

 

when the courts start striking down those laws about where people can carry firearms, I will start perhaps believing you have a clue what you are talking about. I also do not believe that when the 14th amendment was enacted, those enacting it believed it would have the power to remove all police powers concerning the keeping and bearing of arms at a state level. I also do not believe that the right to keep and bear arms is infringed by restrictions on where one can carry firearms such as jails or courthouses

 

Again: What part of you made up the strawman about jails and courthouses See Bruen was unclear?
If you're unable to read the posts, maybe stop posting?
If you're unable to grasp the point, maybe ask a question?

See Bruen.