ubergeek

joined 6 months ago
[–] ubergeek -5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I pray you actually read what people point you too:

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law

[–] ubergeek 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

He was literally telling them live on TV to go storm the Capitol.

That is called "prima facie": facts that speak for themselves.

And it is fully valid to use as a test in a process already codified in law: secretary of state (or similar postition) decides ballot eligibility.

[–] ubergeek 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nah, I was only replying to the part about you not being a 2a supporter, showing you dont have to be, in order to support an armed working class 😀

[–] ubergeek 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We didn’t see Trump break into the White House.

We saw him tell his people to go do it, and the refuse to tell them to stop it.

That's called "leading an insurrection".

[–] ubergeek 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I'm not keen on the 2A, based on it's original purpose and use. I am, however, pro "Under no pretext shall arms and ammunition be surrendered, and any attempts to do should be frustrated, by force, if necessary."

[–] ubergeek 5 points 1 week ago

For all those reasons you named, are exactly the reasons I don't want Dems curtailing the right to keep and bear arms.

Notice ICE focusing on low gun ownership regions?

[–] ubergeek 1 points 1 week ago

In your case, I'd suggest considering the fact that gun laws usually have grandfather clauses, in order to pass constitutional muster (Depriving people of property, without recompense).

So, the fash will be heavily armed, and any resistance to that cannot arm themselves.

[–] ubergeek 12 points 1 week ago

We're not all in the same group... I'm not an ICE agent, but I am a gun toting ~~American~~ working class person.

[–] ubergeek 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

You watch them on TV doing it. And after you see them on TV doing it, they become unqualified for office, based on the due process afforded by the state attorney generals, and/or departments that manage who is and who isn't qualified and can be placed on a ballot, per due process.

You don't need a court to adjudicate being of improper age, do you? Certain items can be considered "prima facie"... Basically: You, and everyone else watched it happens is considered prima facie for processes like this.

 
 

Its ok. We just need to build more luxury housing units, with tax payer dollars. I'm sure the affordable units will eventually trickle down to us all.

1
Box of old memories (thecanadian.social)
view more: ‹ prev next ›