ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ส.ค. 2024
- Fox News' Shannon Bream and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley joined 'America's Newsroom' to discuss their reaction to the Supreme Court's latest ruling on gun rights and how it could impact Hunter Biden's gun case. #FoxNews
Subscribe to Fox News! bit.ly/2vBUvAS
Watch more Fox News Video: video.foxnews.com
Watch Fox News Channel Live: www.foxnewsgo.com/
FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most-watched television news channel for 18 consecutive years. According to a 2020 Brand Keys Consumer Loyalty Engagement Index report, FOX News is the top brand in the country for morning and evening news coverage. A 2019 Suffolk University poll named FOX News as the most trusted source for television news or commentary, while a 2019 Brand Keys Emotion Engagement Analysis survey found that FOX News was the most trusted cable news brand. A 2017 Gallup/Knight Foundation survey also found that among Americans who could name an objective news source, FOX News was the top-cited outlet. Owned by FOX Corporation, FNC is available in nearly 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.
Watch full episodes of your favorite shows
The Five: www.foxnews.co...
Special Report with Bret Baier: www.foxnews.co...
Jesse Watters Primetime: www.foxnews.co...
Hannity: www.foxnews.co...
The Ingraham Angle: www.foxnews.co...
Gutfeld!: www.foxnews.co...
Fox News @ Night: www.foxnews.co...
Follow Fox News on Facebook: / foxnews
Follow Fox News on Twitter: / foxnews
Follow Fox News on Instagram: / foxnews
Gun control is never about controlling guns it's about controlling the people
Oh WOW!!!!! That’s absolutely BRILLIANT!!! What a genius you are!!!! OMG!!!!!! Imagine a world without MUH GUNZ. What would we do. “Gun control is never about controlling guns. It’s about controlling PEOPLE “. Sheer genius
@@dirkdiggler342 👈charlie's jealous
@@dirkdiggler342If you weren't a felon you would own one.
@diggiejohns I do think he's jealous, I think he's an idiot. 😂😂
@@dirkdiggler342👈🏿
little dirky is triggered over Louisiana and the 10 commandments
Shall not be infringed, a concept that eight Justices could not comprehend.
Or you can't....
see at least one MAGA sees the writing on the wall. the rest are happy with foxs side story hiding this ruling, that trumps court has ruled against them,
The eight justices couldn't @@Raptoraddict6610
With rights come responsibilities. Being a grave literal physical danger to someone means you cannot have a firearm. Society needs some semblance of peace and tranquility, or it cannot function.
@@CPTR111 well according to the law you must be proven a danger, which has to proven in court first, strange but true.
I never owned a gun. I have no need for a gun. I have a wonderful smile and common sense. And I have enjoyed a wonderful life to this point. 65. I'm not against guns. Guns aren't the problem. People are the problem.
Nice to live in a bubble😂
Could you please go ahead and state the obvious? Thanks
You might want to get one before this election.
Until they kick in Your front door
Nobody needs one....until you do!
If it affects Bidens case then they will have to let all the other people out of jail for the same thing.
They don't care about anything but getting Hunter off the hook. Get rid of this administration of hypocrisy
I’m sure the person in charge of the Epstein Client List has made calls to keep Hunter out of prison. 😂
@@MrMartinSchneider
Then you better grow eyes in the back of your head.
H. I. L. L. A. R. Y.
Is on the way.😂
@@shakerman55You're still scared of Kankles?
LOLZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@@MrMartinSchneider👨🏿PLEASE!!!!
@@rohns2952as long as she’s free and has access to phone. She’s a problem.
@@tommyguy2960 Maga afraid of a 76 year old woman.
Lol! What are you, WOKE or something?
Scared of the big bad Kankles!!!!
Lolzers!
We want the FARA violations on Hunter along with a few other criminal acts he’s done
Still waiting for Comer to tell me what laws were broken. 🫠
@@Dont.Call.Me.Tall. What laws do influence pedaling and the once ubiquitous “collusion” fall under? THOSE LAWS. Pretty simple.
Felons can't own guns either!
@@jukesjointOG Trump a Felon and sexual predator.
@@jukesjointOG "Where is Jared" with his peace in the Middle East?
I’m pretty sure the NRA was NOT involved in this case.
I agree. It is not their kind of case.
This gun decision is a horrible one. The court is saying that if someone claims that a person is a danger to someone that he no longer has the right to defend himself. Domestic violence offenders often use knives.
It has to be "COURT ORDERED"...buy a clue.
@@Raptoraddict6610 Some courts are run by woke Democrats. Don't trust them.
Knives are messier.😮
@@Raptoraddict6610and those are never corrupt…. 😂
Not only that,too many people these days,just “claim”DV,to lock up their partners out of spite!! 💯It’s not fair,to just be able to take your right away,on unproven allegations!! Horrible idea!!!
Won't do anything for Hunter. He acted with the intent to deceive which is not covered by 2A.
Lmao. You are a putz.... Half gun purchases are done with deceit
Chuck the alcoholic and Bud the hillbilly heroin addict can buy all the guns they want .
He will get probation
Nope..only if you wear the redhat!
False
2nd Amendment shall NOT be infringed!!!!! The Supreme Court is wrong. What don’t you understand about shall NOT be infringed
I’m all for gun rights, but you’re really stupid.
It’s OK to deny Hunter a gun. He’s a felonious dope fiend. If you’re not a felonious dope fiend, your right will never be infringed. Let’s hope you stay clean.
It has been infringed by towns, cities and counties for over 200 years. Sheriffs and Magistrates saying no guns in Dodge or Philly. As the ammendment was originally only a limitation on Congress and the Pres...there have been infringements since at least 90 years by the Fed.
Ship has sailed at least to the lighthouse in the harbor.
Study history so you might have a better argument. The 2nd Amendment may be infringed and has always been infringed, legally.
@@OneWildTurkey point me in the constitution that says it can. This is talking about taking your guns away after even an accusation. They’re slowly taking away our rights. They’re taking away our guns and charging us 40% tax and people like you just go with it.
If Clarence Thomas voted against it,it can't be good for the country.
Get bent traitor
Thomas abstained.
❤Thomas
If your “rights” can be infringed then you have no “rights” at all.
Poor baby...don't break the law.
@@Raptoraddict6610 poor delusional sap. They shall take your rights and you’ll thank them for it.
They are wrong. The 2nd amendment can never be infringed………………………
It's the perjury on the form that he's guilty of..
Felons should not have access to firearms, ever. Should we let inmates have them too, you dunce?
I guess it can be infringed if you LIE on the questionnaire! Why is an alcoholic always an alcholic, but a cocaine addict is only a addict if he is presently taking the drug?
@kenneuse2226
You must be wrong because they did. The law that HB broke, was put on the books years ago.
If you’re not a dope fiend, then the law HB broke, will never affect you.
That ruling has nothing to do with LYING in a firearm application !
Shall not be infringed...unless we say otherwise..
Says on the 2nd amendment shall not be infringed. You lie lady!
The right to bear arms shall not be infringed. "Right to bear Arms". As long as any Arm is available for purchase then it is possible to fulfill your right to bear arms. It is a right to have an arm, however it does not define exactly what kind of arm. So long as you can get an arm then your right is being fulfilled. There are many weapons the military uses where a civilian can only dream of using. Any kind of weapon is an Arm, yet you do not see much of an uproar over the weapons you currently can never buy.
There was an AR ban for awhile as well, SCOTUS never shut it down, instead the GOP let it expire. The ban was never ruled unconstitutional.
If you think any sized arsenal of guns will protect you from a military then you truly are delusional. The Military has stuff you have not even though to think about, and no sized rainstorm of bullets will prevent that tech from taking you out. In fact, the military will finish you off without you ever seeing one soldier.
@@dera6347 There is clear legal precedent for the idea that the 2nd Amendment protects civilian access to "ordinary military equipment". It's been used several times as the legal logic for why things like a sawed off shotgun are not protected. It's certainly not as simple as saying if you have any access at all to any type of firearm then the 2nd Amendment is being fulfilled. To me, standard infantry equipment like a fighting rifle and pistol certainly meets that standard of "ordinary military equipment".
@@dera6347 Stupid argument mate which many conflicts have proven you wrong. The US military can not fight a united armed civilians. It will lose.
So, by this ruling, they can come and take your car because you might speed or run a stop sign. This ruling is 100% wrong.
Nah, it's just your interpretation....unsurprisingly.
Two tiered justice system in action
Two tiered? Convicted felon 45 did this at the start of his term in 2016n the DOJ, NSI, FBI, and SCOTUS. When we take over in 2024, lower house of congress. Then we will subpoena all of them.
How's that!??
@@Sarah-im3lp Sarah is a nice name 💉🫵🏼😷
Thomas is correct in his opinion. You can’t take the right of an individual who has not committed crime.
Way to stand up for those poor... Checks notes... dangerous domestic abusers
@@amoliski I understand it’s emotional for you but it doesn’t make what I said any less true. It also doesn’t mean I have sympathy for domestic abusers. In fact, men are often accused of abuse when nothing actually occurred. Does that individual deserve to have his rights taken away? Absolutely not. This is bigger than said individual inthe court room.
Wife beating isn't a crime?? Gun lovers always live in the 18th century!!
@@JlevGaming There's saying that goes, "The difference between a battered woman and a dead woman is a gun"!!
He's entitle to his own opinion. But the fact is that the majority of the court says differently.
Yes, Rep. Byron Donalds 🇺🇸 for Speaker of the House 2024! 🇺🇸
Excellent choice!I think he’d also make a fantastic VP.
Watching from SouthAfrica,must agree with you seems to be an honest chap which is very rare these days around the world❤😊
Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms. --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.
He does not want that !!! He’s going to be in Trump’s cabinet !
Could you imagine what the democrats would do if we didn’t have the 2nd amendment !
Won’t matter on way or another, his father will pardon him.
but but he says he will not. ha!
I strongly disagree with the decision. Shall not be infringed, does not give room for reasonable disarmament. This is tyrannical decision behavior from a tyrannical gov.
So hunter is innocent?
I agree. All you need is an accusation by by a lying woman and you can get your guns taken away? Ridiculous.
You're right
Hunter IS guilty of breaking an unconstitutional law...
I once had one lady threatened to get restraining order on me after she stole my tools. Lucky for me there was only one judge in the county and he was a personal friend and she was a fugitive
When is the judge going to set Sentencing date?? Come on man!!
This opens the door for tyrants to abuse our rights. It needs clarification.
Terrible ruling by the court, this opens the door for the government to seize anyones firearms on a whim. Oh your neighbor said they feared you so while we figure out why, we are gonna need to just take all these. Yoink.
If you actually read the decision it doesn't say anything remotely like you suggest.
@@howardj602 Please do send me a link to exactly what you read, I based my comment off this specific video. I'm always open to more information.
@@TheJester667 Did you receive the link??
@@TheJester667 Did you read the information?
Whatever his sentence, his father will either commute or pardon it. Bet on that like your next breath.
“I got ya, kiddo! The day after the election, win or lose. Just like the last time, it will be too late for the rubes who believed my lies pertaining to you. Not a joke! 👴”
Joes liable to forget he has kids by that time 😂
@@goldbud2287
He already forgot that he had a grandkid.
But then magically remembered her when it polled poorly.
Hopefully. He shouldn't be reelected
You wouldn't?
What the average person doesn't realize, is that the court reqiures ZERO proof of ANY threat or so called violence against the women. All the women has to do is CLAIM it, and a "protective order" is granted against the husband or boyfriend. So now you WILL lose your rights for literally nothing more than a claim. The order also automatically bans the man from even going back to live in his own house. Lawyers routinely suggest to women that they file a protective order, for the mere fact that there is no defense against it. This is a very real reason not to get involved with women AT ALL. They will absolutely use this against you.
No proof....only a Trump supporter would post such foolishness.
@@Raptoraddict6610 Issue has zero to do with Trump. PFA orders require zero proof, other than the womens claim. That is enough to send any man to county prison on the spot.
Actually, one can be railroaded based on a lie, I'm not that naive!
@@Raptoraddict6610 TDS.
What you don't realize is that the decision says nothing of the kind.
Has anyone watched Minority Report. "you are under arrest for the future crime of..."
show them the ham sandwich, and they'll make up the crime?.....
tell me how often a gun is used and doesn't end in a crime,
So, you're guilty until proven innocent now? Your rights can be taken from you without due process? So, what's next; your car can be taken from you if someone says they have seen you consume alchohol, because you have the potential to drive intoxicated?
He was already adjudicated as threat.
He isn't 'innocent'
@@mnguardianfan7128 A threat? What crime did he commit? Who is the victim? So he's guilty in the court of "pre-crime"?
Vote red ❤️❤️❤️
@@jdmitchell3077 He had a restraining order against him.
Yes, you can lose your rights without due process. What do you think an arrest is? People get arrested and if they cannot pay bail, have to wait in jail for their trial. Sometimes they aren't even given the option of bail. People lose their rights before trial all the time.
We know WAY more about this American than we need to including pics in the buff in public House committees. Why?
Temporary. Like Nixon closing the gold window in the 70s.
Anybody could make a false claim against their partner and get their rights taken away under this ruling. Not consistent with the 2nd Amendment.
Dude, it has to be a COURT ORDERED removal of the weapon...get a grip.
The claim has to be backed up by evidence.
Clarence Thomas correct as usual.
Thomas was the only dissenter. He's out of touch and should resign.
@@Raptoraddict6610 "Out of touch" so the Justices are supposed to do whats in and agreeable not interpret the Law? A person that hasn't been Charged with a Crime and may never be ever should loose their 2nd Amendment Right? Well then at a min at least Hunter lost his shot with this one
Clarence Thomas corrupted as usual... here, I fixed it for you!
@@firstsgt279 Apparently, SCOTUS disagrees with you and is allowing weapons to be removed from dangerous people by a court order.
Who decides whose rights get suspended? That is scary.
One can't help but wonder how "Shall not be infringed" can be interpreted as infringement is okay...
Shall not be infringed !!!! All you smart people are stupid if you don't understand that
Projection ...
Agreed. All you need is an accusation by by a lying woman and you can get your guns taken away? Ridiculous.
Justice Thomas is the only one who got this right.
LOL! He has shown that he is worse than Alito, which I didn't think possible!!
This is difficult but when you're a threat, something needs to be done. However, I do take issue with who decides that firearms should be confiscated. Every time we allow government to get a foot in the door before we know it, they're completely in the house. Little changes, inch by inch over decade or two & they finally get their way. But I don't want fully armed crazed gangsters running around either. It's a fine line that needs treaded very carefully.
@@hlmiller2laws don’t affect gang members they will always be running around armed , they don’t care about laws to began with . It’s not hard to understand. These laws only affect law abiding citizens
@MikeyAR7373 true most of the time but...
Definitely not a win for the 2nd amendment.
It's a win for all Americans.
@@Raptoraddict6610 No it isn't.
all you need is an accusation by by a woman and you can get your guns taken away? Ridiculous.
These decisions suck last couple of days
@@Raptoraddict6610 How.
Trump 2024
Fox News Poll Biden 50% Trump 48%! 🥳🎉 Dark Brandon says: “CUT THE MALARKEY!!!” 😈
81,283,501 of us can't wait to vote again, and many more this time. 😂😂😂💙 💙 💙 💙 💙 💙 💙 💙
@@taylormickelson225I’m sorry you have to do this all week and they don’t let you make lebrons on the weekends.
...for prison!
272,000 new American jobs in May - Thanks Joe. 💙🇺🇸Biden/Harris🇺🇸💙
Just watch the anti-gun types take & twist this the wrong way after the string of losses they’ve taken on gun based cases.
The point of this ruling is that one can TEMPORARILY have their firearm rights withheld under the CONDITION that they are mentally ill to the point of being a danger to themselves & or others.
A restraining order alone isn’t enough to prove that & one needs to go through proper
examination before their rights are taken.
That’s the whole point of due process rights.
Gee, it sure seems like SCOTUS just ruled on that issue and your simply mad you lost.
fox is who twisted this, trump court just ruled against MAGA guns.
anyone with a felony which was a DANGERIOUS felony does not need a WEPON!!!!!!
Those of us following this for a while had a feeling how this was going to end. None of us thought the Supreme Court was going to side with Rahimi. The Supreme Court doesn’t like criminals and will usually not side with them. What we think is going to happen is the Supreme Court will uphold restrictions on people deemed dangerous, but people who are non violent felons will likely end up with their rights restored.
how convenient?
Can anyones allegations get your guns taken?
depends on the state. thats what red flag laws are for to empower the karens.
yes this is a loss for MAGA, and fox makes this all up so MAGA wont see trumps court sent them a loss.
Already does. Just look at divorce cases. Women falsely accuse men all the time and men loose their gun rights.
The issue here is "inalienable".
It means something. Or used to.
all you need is an accusation by by a woman and you can get your guns taken away? Ridiculous.
It means common sense.
Inalienable rights are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But, that doesn't mean you get to infringe on the inalienable rights of others.
@shannonmiller1129 yes but she’s still alive and there’s a pending investigation……so
👉*”…SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED!”* 👈
Grow up dmfk
Bad ruling. They got it wrong.
Conservative trolls coming to hunters defense? That’s new 😂
@@1Biswet HAHA, their Love of guns is so strong they will defend anyone to keep them.
@@lancenorton1117 Your inability to read or comprehend is indicative of a bad public school “education.”
Shall not be infringed is pretty clear
A well Regulated Militia, Is also very clear. Why do most people only seem to know the last 3rd of that amendment?
Unless you're a criminal! Then you give up your rights!
You people sure hate freedom
@Sarah-im3lp if a right can be taken away it's not a right, it's a privilege
@dera6347 a well regulated military has nothing to do with government restrictions
Nobody really cares if Hunter gets a felony. As a 2A proponent, I would rather have him exonerated and the anti-gun lobby takes a huge loss. That said, his tax case in September should send him to jail like other celebrities have gone for lesser amounts.
Hunter paid his back taxes including penalties and interest long ago dmfk. How do you feel about trump going to prison for his multitude of crimes????
You either stick with your values, or go against trump by wishing Hunter to be exonerated. That is what I’m seeing in this comment section.
@@1Biswet Trump doesn't care about Hunter. He cares about how Hunter's laptop and the work done by the House to uncover the myriad of money laundering sending money directly into Biden accounts, even Joe's. Ask anybody in banking or finance, this is shady has hell and usually ends up in confiscation of funds and jail time. Except for the Bidens. The DOJ is negligent for not taking this up, and that is another threat to our democracy; the DOJ being political.
I wonder if NO CONTEST in a court stands especially if no evidence for violence is found? You do clases for no evidence especially when it should only be Disturbing the peace charge.
But how is that NOT an infringement on a person's 2nd Amendment rights? What if democrats filed a restraining order against all Republicans?
How? He was found guilty before this decision He's a felon
SCOTUS got this one WRONG !!!!
Not according to a majority of us...
@@Raptoraddict6610 you’re just a liberal prick who doesn’t like freedom
@raptoraddict...your reasoning is erroneous...you're arguing the Government has the right to run a background check on you if you want to vote, issue you a permit to speak, make you wait to assemble to protest...the 2nd amendment protects your right to do those things without government intervention, or are you afraid of freedom...can't have it both ways...
@@JohnPublic-dk7zd You can live like a frightened child if you want. I won't.
@@Raptoraddict6610funnily this ruling helps protect actual frightened children with abusive fathers. I'm glad you're a big strong muscley tough bad boy, but I think your abusive buddies shouldn't be allowed to have guns.
Anyone can say anything to get your rights taken away if that’s the case even just being despite the other person!
The acting president of Ukraine, Pan Zelinsky, said that the elections in the United States should be canceled. It is criminal to spend his money at such an alarming moment.
Of course they can restrict your gun rights; they do it to felons.
Well, the reasonable end of that, is it's someone who went to court and could defend the accusation. Well we all have ALL the confidence in the world THAT wouldn't be abused. BUT this case covers if someone is simply ACCUSED!
Thanks paid troll.
All you need is an accusation by by a lying woman and you can get your guns taken away? Ridiculous.
Its not about owning guns. Its the fact he LIED on the background check...........
Frankly, if Hunter sets a precedent attacking the whole thing, it'll be a net win for the rest of us.
Background checks are an infringement, period...let's be free...! and yes, that includes the bad guys...
@@alexipestov7002 This is about him lying on the background paper. This case has nothing to do with owning guns. His lawyers are idiots. Any normal person they would be about to go to prison for 5 years.
FJB and his whole creepy crook family.
Meanwhile Chuck who drinks a 6 pack and whisky evey night and bud who's hooked on oxycontin while buying guns aren't prosecuted ???
Ridiculous comment
What's a six pack of (and it's spelled) whiskey?
@@HeritageSoftailNot if its Scotch Whisky you ignorant little child
@@HeritageSoftail Are you illiterate ?
racist
A COURT ORDER is required to take anyones guns... What is wrong with that???
😂😂Because the courts are sometimes corrupt!! Are you serious!!!!🙄#💪ALWAYS!!!!!! 💯
The Question is for how long can they keep you from getting your weapon back. There has to be precedent for that
Guessing...but it would likely be up to the States where convicted.
NO this isn't in regards to a CONVICTION! This is in regards to an ACCUSATION, and is a GIANT violation to due process!
When they attack Hunter it makes me want to VOTE for Hunter more because when they attack Hunter they're attacking me and Hunter is just in their way
What are you talking about.
@@ImaLurkin Hunter has EARNED my vote
Such a dangerous ruling
Disappointed
But bad facts lead to bad law
Agreed. All you need is an accusation by by a lying woman and you can get your guns taken away? Ridiculous.
What effect if any does it have on Red Flag laws?
Domestic abusers shouldn't have guns, but one can be railroaded into being accused as one as a part of a lie!
thousands of Americans with the same problem as HUNTER, no trial...
You don’t need to have it figured out
Start, fail, learn.
Experience is the pathway to success.
This is a straight up gossip channel
I agree w/justice thomas.we must accept a degree of risk to preserve our liberties.bear in mind that according to libs anyone that votes conservative id unhinged.its a slippery slope.
MAGA conservative are very unhinged!!
So if some chick calls the cops because you threw her out for being crazy or push her away to protect yourself, you get your right to protect yourself taken away? Nice... Stay single, men! Hit and quit!
There are many here quoting the dissenting Justice Thomas in this case. Forgetting that in a previous decision he made the opinion the the right is not an absolute right, and is subject to the laws of the states.
Bad for 2nd amendment rights
How so?
Compare to your 1st amendment rights...do you need a government issued permit to speak your opinion...? a waiting period before you can assemble to protest...a background check to go to church...? why are you so afraid to be free...?
@@JohnPublic-dk7zdalmost as if people keep abusing their second amendment rights and keep murdering people... An amendment gave them to you, an amendment will take them away if you don't get your act together.
I love the ads where a convicted criminal who claims to be a billionaire begs working class americans for $5 donations...😂😮😅😂
Hunter has EARNED my vote
This is a serious infringement on peoples constitutional right to religious choice. Shame on the people of Louisiana.
So we live in an age where an english phrase "shall not be infringed" REALLY MEANS... " shall be infringed, sometimes temporally allegedly".
Y'all always forget the first half of the sentence.
@@amoliski I never forget this part: the right of the people to keep and bear Arms
@@72chrisbassg I guess you forgot that the people that were addressed at the time of the writing had to be free, white, able bodied between the ages of 17 and 45.
@@howardj602 the words say, "right of the people", doesn't say free, white able bodied or anything like that.
@@72chrisbassg You are correct. That is the description of those who are required to present themselves for service into the Militia. Which the second amendment very strongly mentions as the reason for its existence. The second amendment signed in Dec. 15, 1791 was the enabling legislation for the Militia Act of 1792, signed on May 1792 six months later.
It was not voluntary enrollment, but the first authorized conscription of a military for defense of the new Republic.
I have no faith in our justice system, I wonder what was thrown into the fine print....
FJB and his Criminal Family! TRUMP 2024
TRUMP to his lawyer: "When I go to prison, am I able to have conjugal visits with Ivanka?"
Hunter belongs in prison, but not for stupid gun buying regulations. Get rid of gun buying laws for legal Americans.
Does this mean police officers who abuse there spouses can have their guns taken?
If it was Trumps son what would happen?
Trumps kids are Successful, intelligent people. Not worthless crackheads. That's Bidens great fathership
If it was your son what would happen? If it was his son what would happen? If it was her son what would happen? If it was (fill in the blank)😂
If trump were the president and trump's son committed any crime, trump's son would be pardoned so fast it would make your head spin.
@@Acein3055. Like Manaforte, Papadopolis, Stone, Flynn. All convicted of felonies, all pardoned by the President for whom they committed those crimes.
@@Acein3055 Probably. And Joe will probably pardon Hunter.
Hard to believe that there was even one dissenter in the 8-1 decision. Then you see that it's clarence thomas, the man who is available to the highest bidder! He is an embarrassment to the supreme court, along with loser samuel alito.
This ruling could keep anyone from owning a gun.
And everyone is dumb to realize it. It doesn't require a jury of peers.
Rights are absolute, if a person is to dangerous to be free and infringed on others rights. Should they be free?
Pre-Crime
Lets take away a persons rights because they MIGHT do something...
That is correct, it's called "credible evidence'!!
@@Sarah-im3lp
"Credible Evidence" of what???
How do you get evidence of what "Could" happen?
Crystal ball?
@@DeepSeaToasterFighting A credible "witness"! A credible woman (with a bruised face) goes to police and says, "He slaps me around every night, and he has a gun in his dresser"!
Now with this. You could post the wrong thing and they’ll come take your guns.
Your hatred over hunter didn't get you to see this it's why I never agree with the government if they go after anyone they will go after all but people get riled up over news of they did this ir they did that it's why it's always better to protect the citizen not government so enjoy your privileges being eroded
Better start scubbing your comment history.😂
I agree that the Supreme Court is right. This case should be reviewed again. This trial should be tossed out. The prosecution has no case against Hunter Biden.
Shall not be infringed. That’s what it says
Don't beat your wife and it wont be infringed.
And it is illegal to be asking that question on a gun form of anything they have no right to be asking any questions that's what a background check is for
Do you know what Illegal means? Apparently not
@@thewoodmoose you need to be educated as to what the constitution states and doesn't state
@thewoodmoose whether you drink or are on drugs and pharmaceutical counts, you still have the right to defend yourself, you don't lose that right because you drink or do drugs or are prescribed drugs. Then everyone drinking alcohol into tipsy land should not be allowed the right to defend themselves said no one! All of these things are excuses to infringe upon your second Amendment which protects your first
How are those shares of Truth Social working out for you MAGAs?
It debuted at $79 per share. It's down to $24 the last I checked.
@@terrencekane8203 Down 48% since Trump's 34 felony convictions. I just hope it goes to zero. It might make MAGAs realize just how they have been played by Trump.
@@terrencekane8203If that is true It still hasn't dropped as fast as the number of Ukrainian survivors. Russia is really "Putin" it to their a$$😂🤣🤘
I'm with Clarence Thomas. Look what they've done to Trevor Bauer. All it takes is someone or several someones with $$$$ in their eyes to testify against you, and boom! no more guns.
Perjury is still a crime...
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. I do not see how any law barring gun ownership is legal. The Amendment is clear. "Shall not be infringed". There is no exception in the Amendment.
LOL.. You can't be serious...
@@Raptoraddict6610 Oh but I am. The Amendment is clear. Shall not be infringed". Little doubt in that wording.
@@billstapleton1084 OK, enjoy November.
Can't wait to vote blue down the ballot 🌊🇺🇸🌊
YOU ARE DEFINITELY BRAIN DEAD.
The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Period. A right can't be temporaryly suspended or taken away.
That's why they're called inalienable.
Even if you did something wrong?
This ruling doesn't require you to do anything.
@@FrankGardner-ep9ih but monitor
@@nandy1256 decided by a court of law ? Sure. Decided by a social worker and a pissed off spouse?
He lied. PERIOD! If it was a common everyday person, they'd throw the book at us.
A new law cannot go back to a old crime that happened to get off the charges !
The problem I see with this ruling is that it depends on a court having found that the person poses a credible threat. That makes it sound like there's an actual deliberative process involved, which there is not. All it typically takes for a court to issue an order is for a woman to claim that she's been threatened. The accused doesn't even get to defend himself, because it's an ex parte process.There are also jurisdictions where restraining orders are routinely issued in all contested divorce cases, with no evidence required.
The accused always gets to see a judge and give his side, and his weapons may be returned! There is due process!
@@Sarah-im3lp After the fact, yes, they get to try to prove their innocence (which is typically impossible, since you can't prove a negative). Never mind that that completely upends our system.
Can I roll my eyes about Hunter Biden in this case?
All it’s going to take now is for certain jurisdictions to say that every gun owner poses a threat to safety and boom they can take all their guns. I am 100% with Clarence Thomas on this one.
Hunter was never found by a court to be a danger so his rights can’t be suspended .
Do not forget Hunters girl friend took the gun and threw it in the trash, she needs to go to prison because she put children in harms way.
Hunter did not have these charges, yes anyone wanting to hurt someone with a gun then they need to go to prison