Muskets were designed as weapons of war.https://twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/1107452120054280193 …
-
-
-
Replying to @MrBobbyFakeName
If you can't see why this presents a problem for Joe's argument, which is based entirely on whether a gun is designed as a weapon of war, the profession of law is probably not for you.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @baseballcrank
except Scalia specifically address military-style weaponry in the Heller decision -- mentioning M-16 by name. Luckily for us, intentionally misconstruing someone's point to its most simplistic terms, like you've done to
@JoeNBC, isn't a sound legal argument.1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MrBobbyFakeName
You probably should have read the preceding paragraph. Judges don't like it when you cite cases that way.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @baseballcrank
Yes, you're absolutely right on this. That's why the Assault Weapons Ban was immediately found unconstitutional and overturned. Or not, whichever.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
I can't force anyone to take it, but typically my advice to people entering my profession is not to lead with insults and to actually read the cases & the laws. YMMV
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.