Community >> View Thread

Author
bd2999 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


So SCOTUS today pretty much redefined firearm ownership. In overturning a NY law they set a new standard where

"Only if a firearm regulation is consistent with this Nation's historical tradition may a court conclude that the individual's conduct falls outside the Second Amendment's unqualified command," Thomas said. "We too agree, and now hold, consistent with Heller and McDonald, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect an individual's right to carry a hand- gun for self-defense outside the home."

To me this is hot garbage. In the leaked draft from Alito the upcoming abortion decision rests on some of the same reasoning. Only things that were ok in the past (from some arbitrary point) are ok and should guide the law going forward.

Which leads to the question, what history should you look at? For women's health decisions do we only count the periods where they had a voice in politics or does before that count because men knew better? Do we ignore the gun control regulation from the founding generation or the various court rulings finding against the individual right to own a gun as a Constitutional right.

SCOTUS at the moment is out of control and bashing through every barrier put in place by prior courts for no other reason than they have the power to do so. I guess they think they are correcting every court decision since 1920 or something.

The upcoming West Virginia case worries me as it alone could pretty much undermine how the Federal government has run from nearly the onset but in particular how it has run as the world becomes more complex. That Congress has delegated the details to regulatory agencies to adjust and update may be out the window and with it everything from worker safety, many environmental laws and so on.

It is probably the wet dream of conservative deregulator types, but it is catastrophic for any issue and greatly reduces presidential power. Not always a bad thing, but this court has very much been along the line of back GOP president unless they cannot help it and go against the Dem one. And it is fairly blatant that they are doing it.

I am sure I will be even angry in the coming days with the Dobbs and West Virginia cases looming.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 102.0.5005.124 on Windows 10
Late Great Donald Blake 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,511


SCOTUS at the moment is out of control and bashing through every barrier put in place by prior courts for no other reason than they have the power to do so. I guess they think they are correcting every court decision since 1920 or something.




LGDB: Well no other reason besides of course that these are basically the simple predicates of their ideology and they're a part of a political strategy that's been cooking for the better part of 30 years. And yeah this Supreme Court is a total disaster. I think the only thing to do is for the Dems to pack the court. I'm not confident they will, but otherwise, an progressive legislation except for super modest proposals are going to be stillborn. Even away from THIS court the SCOTUS has absorbed too much power and is a totally undemocratic institution. The whole foundations of these criticism of the SCOTUS having this much power is precisely because of the anxiety that the Court might be populated with these kinds of fanatical arch conservatives.

I have pretty radically different ideas about guns than you (it seems) but even I think this Federalist Society Frankenstein's monster is basically explicitly trying to rework the architecture of your government one cherry picked case at a time.


cheers,
---the late great Donald Blake


Posted with Google Chrome 102.0.0.0 on Windows 10
bd2999 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008


Thomas makes an extension that birth control, gay marriage and so on should be reconsidered as well as they were demonstrably erroneous rulings.

So, no reason to think the hits will not keep coming on this front.

It is just some gymnastics being done to justify some positions and not others. For that matter all of this undermines the courts legitimacy.

Sure, the court should overrule bad decisions, but I think it is clear this court does not understand what that means as it ignores numerous rulings before it. As it clearly understands the Constitution better than any other court that has ever been.

What a joke.




Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 102.0.5005.124 on Windows 10
bd2999 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



    Quote:
    SCOTUS at the moment is out of control and bashing through every barrier put in place by prior courts for no other reason than they have the power to do so. I guess they think they are correcting every court decision since 1920 or something.



    Quote:

    LGDB: Well no other reason besides of course that these are basically the simple predicates of their ideology and they're a part of a political strategy that's been cooking for the better part of 30 years. And yeah this Supreme Court is a total disaster. I think the only thing to do is for the Dems to pack the court. I'm not confident they will, but otherwise, an progressive legislation except for super modest proposals are going to be stillborn. Even away from THIS court the SCOTUS has absorbed too much power and is a totally undemocratic institution. The whole foundations of these criticism of the SCOTUS having this much power is precisely because of the anxiety that the Court might be populated with these kinds of fanatical arch conservatives.


Indeed. And it is not even the first time it has been. One could make a case that within the last 50 or 80 years court decisions that could be seen as progressive and not always benefitting the wealth, white and so on are the exception rather than the rule.


    Quote:
    I have pretty radically different ideas about guns than you (it seems) but even I think this Federalist Society Frankenstein's monster is basically explicitly trying to rework the architecture of your government one cherry picked case at a time.


Maybe, I do not know your view. I am not sure I laid out mine in this post.

Among my issues with the ruling is basing the Constitutionality of something on historical precedent while not feeling bound to the past historical rulings of courts as a guide.

Justices are not historians and history is messy. It is just an enormously inefficient standard to judge anything by in my view. If they want to be originalists than they should not be selectively applying the rules when it suits them, but that would require more of a logical frame work.

At this point the court majority are partisans and ideologs. Based on history up to the Founding (from a few more historical sources) gun control is Constitutional. But they also could not account for everything and what weapons people coauld have or would exist. So, to use history as a standard means that extrapolation would be required at best to account for it, which this court would not allow.

Justice Bryer stated the hypocrisy well in his dissent but that has no real impact.








Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 102.0.5005.124 on Windows 10
Vee


Member Since: Sun Nov 04, 2018



    Quote:
    Thomas makes an extension that birth control, gay marriage and so on should be reconsidered as well as they were demonstrably erroneous rulings.


Don't forget mixed race marriage rulings which, as we all know, he won't touch.


    Quote:
    So, no reason to think the hits will not keep coming on this front.



    Quote:
    It is just some gymnastics being done to justify some positions and not others. For that matter all of this undermines the courts legitimacy.



    Quote:
    Sure, the court should overrule bad decisions, but I think it is clear this court does not understand what that means as it ignores numerous rulings before it. As it clearly understands the Constitution better than any other court that has ever been.



    Quote:
    What a joke.





Posted with Google Chrome 84.0.4147.125 on Linux
atrimus


Location: Saint Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,478


Perhaps not Thomas himself, but his statement has surely open Pandora’s Box to interracial marriage, and given the numerous instances of not-so-subtle racism seen on the right in recent years, it’s hard to trust that a right-leaning SCOTUS won’t revisit interracial marriage in the future.

To be blunt, the left needs to stop being pansies and start arming themselves, because at some point the diarrhea is gonna hit the fan.



Posted with Apple iPhone
Late Great Donald Blake 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 7,511


Before anybody could ever talk about any kind of armed struggle we need to greatly increase our numbers organized around a class conscious project. That means of course rejecting neoliberal capitalism and forwarding the needs of working class people which is to say the forces of democracy. Don't get me wrong I'm not discouraging any radical action. Just saying you need the people before you get the guns.


cheers,
--- the late great Donald Blake


Posted with Google Chrome 102.0.0.0 on Linux
bd2999 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



    Quote:
    Perhaps not Thomas himself, but his statement has surely open Pandora’s Box to interracial marriage, and given the numerous instances of not-so-subtle racism seen on the right in recent years, it’s hard to trust that a right-leaning SCOTUS won’t revisit interracial marriage in the future.


I do not think he mentioned it specifically, but interracial marriage hangs on the same legal theories that support the others. It is self interest at its finest. Honestly, interracial marriage, by polling, is still not popular in some Southern States. So, who knows.

I think birth control is more likely to have test cases floated by conservative groups to get to SCOTUS to do something about it. If nobody challenges for harm than they could just piece meal it by taking away the ones indicated and not the ones that they do not want to do so.

Regulating birth control, gay marriage and things like type of sex in the bed room are all thing conservative groups will gladly attack and seem to undo.

Also while chipping away the Establishment Cause and the power of the other branches of government and diminishing legal rights of minority groups. Among other things.


    Quote:
    To be blunt, the left needs to stop being pansies and start arming themselves, because at some point the diarrhea is gonna hit the fan.


This is a bit hostile for me but I think the sentiment is probably correct.

I think mobilizing and so on at this point is tricky to do in ways that traditionally should work though. Gerrymandering, laws to reduce voting rights, rework other laws to maintain power...

Honestly the conservative movement has a nearly perfect system in place to truly become authoritarian in a selectively Constitutional way. Not making it facist exactly, but basically being facist. And we are seeing that or the desire to get to that. I do not like saying that but it seems to be clearer and clearer that is the goal.

And the solutions are harder and harder to really figure out with the systems in place right now. As it is not likely that even the means of redress will still be there in two years or five. Democracy may be long dead in the US at that point.

And I wish that was an exaggeration but it is very much possible.






Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 103.0.5060.53 on Windows 10
The Avenger


Location: New Jersey
Member Since: Thu Dec 02, 2021



    Quote:
    Before anybody could ever talk about any kind of armed struggle we need to greatly increase our numbers organized around a class conscious project. That means of course rejecting neoliberal capitalism and forwarding the needs of working class people which is to say the forces of democracy. Don't get me wrong I'm not discouraging any radical action. Just saying you need the people before you get the guns.



I think Atrimus may have been advising the Left to arm themselves in self-defense against an armed assault by the Right. But I could easily be misinterpreting, and if so, my apologies.

I've come to a political view which, in some ways, is on your wavelength, LGDB. But I don't (yet) subscribe to the idea that all issues boil down to the class struggle. For example, how does the class struggle inform the debate around concealed carry of a firearm? Guns are owned and carried by poor people, middle class people, and rich people. If anything, since the poor and middle class outnumber the rich, I would think a Marxist would favor expanding the ownership and carrying of firearms. Do you in fact favor that?






Posted with Google Chrome 103.0.5060.53 on Windows 10
atrimus


Location: Saint Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,478



    Quote:

      Quote:
      Before anybody could ever talk about any kind of armed struggle we need to greatly increase our numbers organized around a class conscious project. That means of course rejecting neoliberal capitalism and forwarding the needs of working class people which is to say the forces of democracy. Don't get me wrong I'm not discouraging any radical action. Just saying you need the people before you get the guns.



    Quote:

    I think Atrimus may have been advising the Left to arm themselves in self-defense against an armed assault by the Right. But I could easily be misinterpreting, and if so, my apologies.


You’re correct. Some of the same Justices that overturned Roe v Wade once called it settled law; Republican officials have both subtly and brazenly called for physically assault on their political opponents; “Stop the Steal” nonsense; Jan 6th; the open association with (and in some cases, endorsement of) extreme right racists/fascist organizations, etc. The right has gradually chipped at the wall called “What can we get away with” and at some point they’re gonna breech that wall into outright armed authoritarianism.

Protesting has done zilch. Gerrymandering, and a host of repressive laws passed Republican state legislature (and upheld by the Supreme Court), has all but rendered voting a futile enterprise. I’m in no way an armed revolution type, but the trend set by the right suggests that reality is gonna come to a point where the left will either have to cede it’s existence as it is now, or take up arms in self defense.


    Quote:
    I've come to a political view which, in some ways, is on your wavelength, LGDB. But I don't (yet) subscribe to the idea that all issues boil down to the class struggle. For example, how does the class struggle inform the debate around concealed carry of a firearm? Guns are owned and carried by poor people, middle class people, and rich people. If anything, since the poor and middle class outnumber the rich, I would think a Marxist would favor expanding the ownership and carrying of firearms. Do you in fact favor that?






Posted with Apple iPhone
bd2999 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Before anybody could ever talk about any kind of armed struggle we need to greatly increase our numbers organized around a class conscious project. That means of course rejecting neoliberal capitalism and forwarding the needs of working class people which is to say the forces of democracy. Don't get me wrong I'm not discouraging any radical action. Just saying you need the people before you get the guns.

      Quote:

        Quote:

        I think Atrimus may have been advising the Left to arm themselves in self-defense against an armed assault by the Right. But I could easily be misinterpreting, and if so, my apologies.



    Quote:
    You’re correct. Some of the same Justices that overturned Roe v Wade once called it settled law; Republican officials have both subtly and brazenly called for physically assault on their political opponents; “Stop the Steal” nonsense; Jan 6th; the open association with (and in some cases, endorsement of) extreme right racists/fascist organizations, etc. The right has gradually chipped at the wall called “What can we get away with” and at some point they’re gonna breech that wall into outright armed authoritarianism.


They are not seeing any punishment for it. Some of those folks win primary votes to power. The GOP base has become fairly extremist. Not everyone but they are putting forth pretty bad folks.

Honestly, unless high level people are punished for January 6th nothing is going to change and next time the coup may work.


    Quote:
    Protesting has done zilch. Gerrymandering, and a host of repressive laws passed Republican state legislature (and upheld by the Supreme Court), has all but rendered voting a futile enterprise. I’m in no way an armed revolution type, but the trend set by the right suggests that reality is gonna come to a point where the left will either have to cede it’s existence as it is now, or take up arms in self defense.


Probably so. I think one big problem is that the left is harder to rile up. Momentum fades faster a bit of the time as opposed to those who hold grudges. And the GOP, like you said, is really good at holding onto power once they have it. Pretty much kicking democracy in any form to the curve.

All of that is a real problem, but highlighted with SCOTUS and probably the biggest problem that it is just checking off conservative wish list items at this point. Something needs to be done with regards to that. Most other countries do not have an absolute court that pretty much establishes rules as it goes and can change the regulations on the fly despite having to ignore decades of confirmational rulings. Term limits, putting more on the court or something needs to happen.

And the avenues to achieve these goals within the system and one of the parties participating is really hard. Particularly with a system already resistant to change.

I hear and empathize with you. I think it is a downer for sure. There are always regressions in history but this one particularly hurts.

The window to meaningfully act on climate change is closing and it looks like nothing will be done by the US government since one party has decided it does not want to do it.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      I've come to a political view which, in some ways, is on your wavelength, LGDB. But I don't (yet) subscribe to the idea that all issues boil down to the class struggle. For example, how does the class struggle inform the debate around concealed carry of a firearm? Guns are owned and carried by poor people, middle class people, and rich people. If anything, since the poor and middle class outnumber the rich, I would think a Marxist would favor expanding the ownership and carrying of firearms. Do you in fact favor that?





Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 103.0.5060.53 on Windows 10
atrimus


Location: Saint Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 2,478



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:
          Before anybody could ever talk about any kind of armed struggle we need to greatly increase our numbers organized around a class conscious project. That means of course rejecting neoliberal capitalism and forwarding the needs of working class people which is to say the forces of democracy. Don't get me wrong I'm not discouraging any radical action. Just saying you need the people before you get the guns.

        Quote:

          Quote:

          I think Atrimus may have been advising the Left to arm themselves in self-defense against an armed assault by the Right. But I could easily be misinterpreting, and if so, my apologies.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        You’re correct. Some of the same Justices that overturned Roe v Wade once called it settled law; Republican officials have both subtly and brazenly called for physically assault on their political opponents; “Stop the Steal” nonsense; Jan 6th; the open association with (and in some cases, endorsement of) extreme right racists/fascist organizations, etc. The right has gradually chipped at the wall called “What can we get away with” and at some point they’re gonna breech that wall into outright armed authoritarianism.



    Quote:
    They are not seeing any punishment for it. Some of those folks win primary votes to power. The GOP base has become fairly extremist. Not everyone but they are putting forth pretty bad folks.


No, not everyone, but the rational elements of the Republican party have definitely become the minority.


    Quote:
    Honestly, unless high level people are punished for January 6th nothing is going to change and next time the coup may work.


I’d like to be wrong, but I’m not even sure that will help. They’ll just twist any prosecution of Jan 6th culprits into claims that said culprits are being unfairly and unjustly persecuted. And they’ve sewn and stoked so much conspiratorial doubt in the system that enough Republican voters will buy into it.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      Protesting has done zilch. Gerrymandering, and a host of repressive laws passed Republican state legislature (and upheld by the Supreme Court), has all but rendered voting a futile enterprise. I’m in no way an armed revolution type, but the trend set by the right suggests that reality is gonna come to a point where the left will either have to cede it’s existence as it is now, or take up arms in self defense.



    Quote:
    Probably so. I think one big problem is that the left is harder to rile up. Momentum fades faster a bit of the time as opposed to those who hold grudges. And the GOP, like you said, is really good at holding onto power once they have it. Pretty much kicking democracy in any form to the curve.


True about the left being harder to rile. I’d like to hope that RvW being overturned might light a more prolonged fire under some seats though.


    Quote:
    All of that is a real problem, but highlighted with SCOTUS and probably the biggest problem that it is just checking off conservative wish list items at this point. Something needs to be done with regards to that. Most other countries do not have an absolute court that pretty much establishes rules as it goes and can change the regulations on the fly despite having to ignore decades of confirmational rulings. Term limits, putting more on the court or something needs to happen.


I’ve grudgingly come around to the idea of stacking the courts, if for no other reason than to check it’s power. It’s comical how the Supreme Court is supposed to be one of the cogs in the checks-and-balances system, yet it itself has no check on its authority.


    Quote:
    And the avenues to achieve these goals within the system and one of the parties participating is really hard. Particularly with a system already resistant to change.



    Quote:
    I hear and empathize with you. I think it is a downer for sure. There are always regressions in history but this one particularly hurts.



    Quote:
    The window to meaningfully act on climate change is closing and it looks like nothing will be done by the US government since one party has decided it does not want to do it.


Lo and behold:

https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-epa-ruling-2e893673819a1b6c6aa272a5e814f0b0


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        I've come to a political view which, in some ways, is on your wavelength, LGDB. But I don't (yet) subscribe to the idea that all issues boil down to the class struggle. For example, how does the class struggle inform the debate around concealed carry of a firearm? Guns are owned and carried by poor people, middle class people, and rich people. If anything, since the poor and middle class outnumber the rich, I would think a Marxist would favor expanding the ownership and carrying of firearms. Do you in fact favor that?




Posted with Apple iPhone
bd2999 

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008



    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:

            Quote:
            Before anybody could ever talk about any kind of armed struggle we need to greatly increase our numbers organized around a class conscious project. That means of course rejecting neoliberal capitalism and forwarding the needs of working class people which is to say the forces of democracy. Don't get me wrong I'm not discouraging any radical action. Just saying you need the people before you get the guns.

          Quote:

            Quote:

            I think Atrimus may have been advising the Left to arm themselves in self-defense against an armed assault by the Right. But I could easily be misinterpreting, and if so, my apologies.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          You’re correct. Some of the same Justices that overturned Roe v Wade once called it settled law; Republican officials have both subtly and brazenly called for physically assault on their political opponents; “Stop the Steal” nonsense; Jan 6th; the open association with (and in some cases, endorsement of) extreme right racists/fascist organizations, etc. The right has gradually chipped at the wall called “What can we get away with” and at some point they’re gonna breech that wall into outright armed authoritarianism.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        They are not seeing any punishment for it. Some of those folks win primary votes to power. The GOP base has become fairly extremist. Not everyone but they are putting forth pretty bad folks.



    Quote:
    No, not everyone, but the rational elements of the Republican party have definitely become the minority.


Sure seems that way. I am still generally of the mind (even though it is a distinction without a difference) that most are not like hardcore Trump MAGA fans, but most are just as happy to go along with it even if they are not so directly toxic in speech.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      Honestly, unless high level people are punished for January 6th nothing is going to change and next time the coup may work.



    Quote:
    I’d like to be wrong, but I’m not even sure that will help. They’ll just twist any prosecution of Jan 6th culprits into claims that said culprits are being unfairly and unjustly persecuted. And they’ve sewn and stoked so much conspiratorial doubt in the system that enough Republican voters will buy into it.


Oh, that will happen for sure. I mean they have done it for Jan 6th. Like that one lady that got shot while breaking in to get to Congresspeople become an icon in some right wing circles for reasons that make no sense. An African American or group of school kids can get gunned down and they will defend gun rights, self defense and so on but actively support a woman breaking through baracades to get to elected representatives being evacuated.

I still think something needs done even at that risk though. If nothing is done than it is just a dinner bell. Although it could just be symbolic in the end. As a future president could pardon them and so on and so forth. Which is depressing to no end.

The GOP in particular often does some pretty bad things and then sets it up as the Dem president to follow would be playing politicals with the legal system for prosecuting them. Torture, illegal wars and so on and so forth. Seems to be a running theme at the moment but the rule of law (already hanging by a thread) makes it necessary to do something.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Protesting has done zilch. Gerrymandering, and a host of repressive laws passed Republican state legislature (and upheld by the Supreme Court), has all but rendered voting a futile enterprise. I’m in no way an armed revolution type, but the trend set by the right suggests that reality is gonna come to a point where the left will either have to cede it’s existence as it is now, or take up arms in self defense.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Probably so. I think one big problem is that the left is harder to rile up. Momentum fades faster a bit of the time as opposed to those who hold grudges. And the GOP, like you said, is really good at holding onto power once they have it. Pretty much kicking democracy in any form to the curve.



    Quote:
    True about the left being harder to rile. I’d like to hope that RvW being overturned might light a more prolonged fire under some seats though.


I think between that and the gun ruling it is something at least. A fair number of folks are mad, but are they mad enough?

The one against the EPA troubles me greatly too along with the ones that basically strip more and more rights from criminal defendants or immigrants. Even having the facts on their side is not enough anymore.

Honestly, doing something about SCOTUS has got to be a rallying cry at this point and a coherent plan to rally around. Things like term limits and so on. Expanding the court always sounds good and I am for it but is going to be a harder sell I think, although the court is not in a good place right now in terms of popularity.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      All of that is a real problem, but highlighted with SCOTUS and probably the biggest problem that it is just checking off conservative wish list items at this point. Something needs to be done with regards to that. Most other countries do not have an absolute court that pretty much establishes rules as it goes and can change the regulations on the fly despite having to ignore decades of confirmational rulings. Term limits, putting more on the court or something needs to happen.



    Quote:
    I’ve grudgingly come around to the idea of stacking the courts, if for no other reason than to check it’s power. It’s comical how the Supreme Court is supposed to be one of the cogs in the checks-and-balances system, yet it itself has no check on its authority.


It is true. I mean hypothetically a Constitutional Amendment can but those are so rare that it makes them pointless.

I think term limits should be put in place as well. I think other things need done but would take longer. Oddly the court gave itself the power it has and there is not a tool to make them as they are. The more extreme they become the president just could stop listening. Not a good thing for the rule of law but if the high court is lawless what else can you do?

I honestly think it's authority needs reworked as well. Give Congress more of a direct tool to resist. As most other Western countries do not have this problem as they have more restrictions on the court.

Tearing rights from people should be highly troubling to all. Saying a law is not ok is one thing but taking a right away that has been on the books for 50 years in addition to other decisions makes no sense. Some precedents should be undone but seems like this one has a goal to be as toxic and reactive as possible going down the check list of GOP grievances.


    Quote:

      Quote:
      And the avenues to achieve these goals within the system and one of the parties participating is really hard. Particularly with a system already resistant to change.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        I hear and empathize with you. I think it is a downer for sure. There are always regressions in history but this one particularly hurts.

        Quote:

          Quote:
          The window to meaningfully act on climate change is closing and it looks like nothing will be done by the US government since one party has decided it does not want to do it.



    Quote:
    Lo and behold:



    Quote:
    https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-epa-ruling-2e893673819a1b6c6aa272a5e814f0b0


This one makes me particularly mad.


    Quote:

      Quote:

        Quote:

          Quote:
          I've come to a political view which, in some ways, is on your wavelength, LGDB. But I don't (yet) subscribe to the idea that all issues boil down to the class struggle. For example, how does the class struggle inform the debate around concealed carry of a firearm? Guns are owned and carried by poor people, middle class people, and rich people. If anything, since the poor and middle class outnumber the rich, I would think a Marxist would favor expanding the ownership and carrying of firearms. Do you in fact favor that?





Look Raist bunnies...
Posted with Google Chrome 103.0.5060.53 on Windows 10

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software