Giffords Director Just Admitted On MSNBC That They Are Full DEFENSE & Are Losing In Spite Rahimi
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 มิ.ย. 2024
- American Hartford Gold: offers.americanhartfordgold.c...
Giffords Director Just Admitted On MSNBC That They Are Full DEFENSE & Are Losing To Spite Rahimi
Articles for Reference:
Source: x.com/GIFFORDS_org/status/180...
Full Decision HERE: www.supremecourt.gov/opinions...
![อาจารย์ยอด : สวยกินคน [ผี]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/_-TIJOwkRA4/mqdefault.jpg)
How can women be at increased risk if they can’t even say what a woman is?
Good question. They probably can't even say what a man is either.
Giffords Director should be losing, their contrary to the Constitution, a free country.
Yeah, they are losing and it's glorious.
Time to sue them for interfere of my 2nd amendment righs
No matter who is coming up with these tyrannical laws, law enforcement is more than willing to enforce them.
This is why Sheriff elections are crucial. ALL POLITICS IS LOCAL.
Buttttt, buttttt Back the blue....👮♀️👮♂️ They are just doing their job.
@@michaelsweaney3890right. That always annoyed me. Ppl are so brainwashed
Yep. Do not trust government agents
That's why you need to learn to make land mines.
I'm getting so sick of the phase "command sence gun control". I bet they have armed guards on their home offices.
I have lots of "COMMON CENTS" going jingle, jingle, jingle in my pocket!
Convicted domestic abusers should be in jail. An angry ex-girlfriend or ex-wife can easily LIE and get a no contact restraining order. The guy has not been convicted of anything.
They're losing because their logic is ludicrous.
Logic? They are using logic? Since when?
The government has no authority to make any laws or regulations against arms per the constitution of the United States.
However, the U.S. Constitution can be amended through congress, with 38 states agreeing to ratification.
@@jonahzablow2132with over half having con carry that ain't happening.😂
@@jonahzablow2132 it has not and will not. More than half the country is constitutional carry now and growing. The revolution started when the government enacted gun control laws. "A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined.but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of Independence from any that might attempt to abuse them. Which would include their own government "- George Washington
@melgillham462 I know. Just pointing out the process.
@@jonahzablow2132 👍
That lady ending sentences with "right".…. Drives me nuts.
Her forehead is all I see.
. Me too! Quite the target. 😅
So she is saying that Domestic Abuse is only a problem for Women and Children... Wow.
Well, of course. Men can't be domestically abused, after all.
@PhycoKrusk
I really hope that was sarcasm on your part. Any more, it's hard to tell.
@@maynardcarmer3148 Ugh, tell me about it.
Well of course! Don't you know men only exist to to be strapped to the plow?
@@maynardcarmer3148Poe's Law is in full effect these days.
Women in this country are 100% more capable of defending themselves from criminals when they carry weapons.
How about women are 21 times more likely to drown in countries with lots of lakes vs those with few lakes!
DUI is relatively rare in Saudi Arabia, too. Might have something to do with alcohol being banned
Not telling the truth...accused not proven. 4th Amendment Rights Due Process of Law.
How about we start saying. COMMON SENSE SELF PROTECTION concerning our rights to own and bear firearms!!! Change the narrative!!!
Thank you braden for the information brother and Giffords Director needs to be abolished and our 2nd amendment shall not be infringed.
Just watched and listened to Mark Smith!! He did a very good job of breaking down the ruling!
ME TOO! ALL OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS NEED TO HEAR WHAT MARK JUST HAD TO SAY
Mark at 4 boxes diner is great.
Him and William Kirk at Washington Gun Law seemed to have the same opinion, which is that the decision is very narrow.
Rahimi was a self-admitted problem. Such a bit difference to a random drive by Red Flag.
Yes, Mark Smith is awesome 99.99% of the time, but he's also unrealistically optimistic on this one. The liberals will abuse the language about analogous laws not needing to be a historical twin to justify the most draconian BS and they will use this decision to ram it through. Thomas is the only justice with a brain.
you can't eat silver or gold but you can feed your family with brass lead and smokeless powder
Those tyrants are always talking out of their ass. She should be sued for mouthing off about guns and the second amendment rights.
The point with Rahlml was this was over a RESTRAINING ORDER, not a trial verdict! Many divorce attorneys will file a restraining order on the ex-husband as a matter of course. Does this mean he is a despicable person? no! But now he can loose his 2nd amendment rights because of a spiteful ex spouse! This is totally wrong!
What a crock! I'm a 68 yo old woman and I not only carry, but I call BS on the very notion that women are in so much danger in this country. Have you seen how many WOMEN carry now? And why would pregnant WOMEN and POSTPARTUM women be more likely to be killed by guns than any other means regardless of country?
All part of their grift, scare the gullable and the uninformed.
Why couldn’t you be 20 years younger?
Well said!
3 wire!! Glad they are on the defense,,, and of course she said pregnant people, they don't know what or how to define a woman!!
Until an act of crime is placed upon a person why own a defense item? Crimes happen protect yourself.
What is a woman? Why do they think other countries are anything for us to look at for our country to use as a model? I don't care how they do it over there. I live in the United States of America.
Obviously she has no idea that women are a large percentage of new pewpew owners.
They just can't help there selfs. Lol, they give it up every time.
Shall not be infringed.
Temporary ban. Didn't specify how Temporary.
It doesn't feel like they're loosing here in California . :(
Canada can help them with any negative feelings they got
That "news" outlet should be called msBS NC cause that's all they put out! That statement about pregnant persons is LUDICROUS because I've NEVER heard of a guy, even one who thinks he's a she, CANNOT GET PREGNANT!! I gotta hand it to you Braden, because there is no way I could do what you guys do every day and stay sane. From the bottom of my heart, THANK YOU! Y'ALL DESERVE WAY MORE THAN 1000 STARS FOR THIS AND WHAT IT MEANS TO US!!!
I think this is just an attempt to stir up their base and drive more donations.
Vast majority my a$$!!!!
Oh no, we're losing!!!! *clutches pearls ironically*
Mark Smith over at 4 Boxes Diner made the valid point that Garland specifically pushed this case as a vehicle to destroy the Bruen methodology and bring back interest balancing. Had he gotten what he wanted, Bruen would have been gutted, except for the specific ruling on the Sullivan law. He Didn't Get It, At All. The decision was made with the Bruen methodology. You might disagree with their historical analogs, but, in the long term, this is a win for our side because the Bruen methodology was preserved.
Mark Smith at Four Boxes Diner has an excellent analysis of Rahimi.
I most assuredly agree with your comment 😊
"PREGANT PEOPLE" WTF?!?!? I swear man we are living the TWILIGHT ZONE!!!!!!!!!!
Her forehead keeps blinding me.
Yeah it's receded pretty bad
I've been saying that for a while. Since Bruen, we've been on offense and pushing them back. The lose in Rahimi is nothing more than a minor inconvenience.
Good news is we are forcing them to adjust their narrative to fit the law that currently exists. It also reveals that they have overstepped and are rightfully being slapped back!
Thank you, Braden
Good.job man
Where do these organizations get their money? Is this another arm of the "intelligence community"??
Shared funds. Buy Girl Scout cookies. You fund it. Donate to Shriners..you fund it. Buy a box of ammo..that FedTax per box..you fund it. Lots of other ways
Thank you, Brenda
It's a win for women how? You can't have a gun to defend against said abusers
This is a win for the 2A. AG garland was trying to dismantle the text history and tradition standard set forth in Heller and Bruen to get interest balancing back. The 2A community dodged a bullet here this is a big win going forward.
Loved "pregnant people'!
You didn’t hear her slip post partum people in behind that? 😂
We'll see how victorious they feel when Range steps up to the plate.
I'm still trying.
To figure out where they're getting the statistic where women and children are mostly affected by gun violence. Because I know that gun purchases have gone up with women. And gun violence affects poor people usually people in the projects.
I agree with this ruling only if there is a legal path to taking any Americans 2nd amendment rights. Also knowing that 60% or more charges of abuse are false claims. If the Citizen automatically gets his 2nd Amendment rights back.Or has a simple road to get it back.
"OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES" 😂😂😂
So now they know what a woman is?
Actually the Supreme Court's ruling on this "domestic violence" thing is a HUGE let down and defeat for me. I work with young men who have been convicted of misdemeanor "domestic violence" who are NOT bad guys, are NOT dangerous and often have NOT done any thing more "violent" than to break their girlfriend's phone during an argument by throwing it on the floor or against the wall. This is NOT to suggest that there aren't genuine domestic violence situations where the guy is likely a potential danger and should probably be restrained from possessing a firearm for a lengthy time, but the "one size fits all" approach is as reckless and abusive as the "no one needs a gun that can hold more than 10 'bullets'" nonsense.
"Domestic violence" is a multi-billion dollar a year profit making racket for the states and if you pay social security you'll be happy to know that your SS "contributions" (i.e. confiscations) help support it. A typical case where a guy, who has done nothing truly VIOLENT or injurious to anyone goes something like this. The guy and his current live in girlfriend have an argument. The argument becomes heated and someone throws something or breaks something without any physical injury to anyone. The cops get called and they take a "report" interviewing both people independently. Of course seldom do the stories match up very well. Regardless of who started the argument, or even regardless of who actually called the cops, the male is automatically presumed to be the "bad guy" and winds up getting charged with something truly violent which he is not even guilty of doing based on the female's say so alone. Remember the politically correct narrative is the girl is totally innocent and the guy is presumed guilty. So they assign a so called "public defender" to the guy's case. This "defender" strolls in rattling his scabbard of sabers telling the guy that the only way out of a lengthy jail sentence and likely felony is a plea bargain. So the scared young man succumbs to the threats and pleas "guilty" to a crime he never committed in hopes of minimizing the damages to his life. Of course under this ruling, the guy can NEVER hope to recover his constitutional right to possess a gun for the rest of his life unless he comes up with around $40,000 and several years of hearings and lawyering to MAYBE - just MAYBE - get his rights restored. I have one man who has been squeaky clean for over 15 years now. No encounters with law enforcement of any kind for any reason, not even a minor traffic violation the entire time. During that time he has held several very responsible jobs in construction and transportation and has even worked as an OSHA advisor for one of his employers. Yet the poor guy is now FOREVER banned from having his constitutional rights, even though he is actually more responsible, stable, law abiding and all around solid American than many of today's "college students", "professors", and political "leaders". It breaks my heart.
Ask her to define a woman!!!
I remember Rush Limbaugh saying that if the world ended, the headlines in the paper the next day would read: World Ends, Women and Minorities Hardest Hit. This woman reminded me of that.
She can move to a better country
She has the comments shut off. So you can disagree with there organization.
Doesn't the decision say that only if a person is ADJUDICATED to be dangerous, he can be disarmed temporarily? And I guess from that lunatic's perspective, no woman has ever abused a man.
*"When you stop chasing the wrong things, you give the right things a chance to catch you."* ---Lolly Daskal
Thanks
#savethegarbles
Braden,
🇺🇸🇺🇸🛬🛬🛬🛬🛬🇺🇸🇺🇸!
Go 2A
The problem is, with rahimi, the "test" for constitutionality has been watered down to the point where bruen has been basically mooted. Instead of "text as informed by history"; the test is "text as kinda informed by history, ish; or something sort of close to that". Sometimes I hate being right, but I saw this coming.
Perfect landing
Maybe someone should send the SCOTUS decision to Needledeck i mean Tweedlebach or whatever his name is. Innocent until proven guilty is what i get out of it. Remember Little Rock!
Disproportionately impacting women, not even close.
The decision verified the correctness of the Bruen decision - even Brown agreed on that.
WE need a completion of the switch back and forth in a short video easy to post. Bad court / Good Court. 😂😂
shhhh.....it's a perfect setup for Range v Garland....hopefully the outrage crowd will be too busy paying attention to the latest thing that week
Take a look at GOA. Massachusetts is going to try to ban semi auto hand guns and rifles.
People at this point just stay healthy and focused none of these rules matter anymore. MAKE SURE YOU VOTE ON ALL LEVELS FROM TOWN COUNCIL ALL THE WAY TO PRESIDENTIAL. THAT'S HOW WE STAY TOGETHER AND STRONG.
Holy hairlines Batman!!
Its MSNBC
Big win for women, kids, and common sense gun reform?
I couldn't pay attention to her words cause that forehead is massive. She's got that LeBron James hairline. Lol. Love everything you do. Keep up the great work.
You nailed it so hard
In other countries its knifes rocks and clubs
Hmm, pretty good at pulling numbers out of the air.
BROTHER!!
Are you just telling me this to make me happy? No. Never mind. I don't want to know.
Common sense, my ass!
Rahimi is our Battle of Coral Sea: A tactical draw, but strategic victory
Midway (AR and mag bans cases) are next. We still have Yorktown, Enterprise, and Hornet (text, history, and tradition), and they can't bring Shokaku and Zuikaku (means-end scrutiny and interest balancing) to the fight.
I wonder how much 5 head is getting paid?
In the Supreme Court ruling early today, was the man found guilty of domestic violence? If so then he was guilty of it, an he received his punishment under the law , just as any one who has broken the law on the books. The second amendment did not lose, as the law allows for the guilty to lose many rights, voting, jobs with the government, travel, firearm ownership, an many others, now if it was a "Red flag case" then I have a BIG PROBLEM with the decision, as there are no due procedures in play, we all know that, I have tried to find out what was going on with the case as little is on line that I have been able to find.
Due process could not be considered in this case as Rahimi had agreed to the entering of the restraining order, but this was NOT someone convicted of Domestic Violence, but subjected to a Domestic Violence Restraining Order.
@@JediHutch61 so the guy shot himself in the foot by agreeing to the order, I didn't know that, as all I could find was the ruling, just goes to show how the internet companies have deleted things that they have been asked to do.
@@stephenquandt6508 Watch The Four Boxes Dinner. Mark Smith goes in depth about the ruling and what it means for the future of the Second Amendment. Reader’s Digest version is this ruling is very limited in scope and doesn’t rubber stamp red flag laws or other provisions that allow for disarmament. It’s narrowly tailored to individuals who are proven Dangerous and have to be limited in time, eg not for life.
Oh the irony! So concerned about women & children being shot, but I’ll bet she thinks it’s not domestic violence or abuse to dis-member a child in the womb!!
Or 28 days after birth
What the mouthpiece for Giffords said was actually worse than you presented it. She gave the perception TO THE PUBLIC that anyone who is accused of domestic abuse is an "abuser". Many people, myself included, have been falsely accused of domestic violence, which is a very serious accusation. She is hoping that the public at large will jump on her train, which is the court of public opinion, and agree that they should not have access to firearms.
Full blown esg?
When do you think Michell will step up
"To spite" or "in spite"?
Yes, you're correct. I fixed it thx!
one question does this mean that cops who beat there wives lose there write to carry guns or is it laws for me but not for the
😊😊👍🏼👍🏼
The one thing I seen in this case is that Mr Rahimi despite the domestic violence protection order managed to buy firearms and on top of that he did not kill or harm the woman in this situation. So explain to me how these so-called protection orders defend women?
😮
Yet they still allow abortion .
Liked
Um what
Remember, it's believe all women. If in a messy divorce, a woman accuses her husband of domestic abuse, we're supposed to believe her. Even if she has No Evidence or if the evidence is saying something completely different.
Sorry, couldn’t watch all of it as there’s a daily limit on the amount of bs I can stomach.
Go Brandon's Go,Go, Gadgets Go Brandon's 😂😮😅
Do they go to class to learn that whiny voice?
It's not a woman its a pregnant person got that correct 😮