Quote of the Day

The Seventh Circuit’s contrived ‘non-militaristic’ limitation on the Arms protected by the Second Amendment seems unmoored from both text and history. And, even on its own terms, the Seventh Circuit’s application of its definition is nonsensical.

Clarence Thomas
U.S. Supreme Court Justice
July 2, 2024
Illinois’ gun ban remains in place, but rights advocates say days are numbered – Washington Examiner

I would like to believe he toned down his thoughts before putting them in writing. I am inclined to believe that not only is the Seventh Circuit decision unmoored from text and history, but the judges are unmoored from reality and/or deliberately lying.


3 thoughts on “Unmoored

  1. That last thing you said. Deliberately lying. They know full well the treason they are committing.
    And like most communists that gain power. Have absolutely no problem using that power to get and gain more.
    They like it when you know their lying. Because they get off on your confusion. And your realization of their power. Very much like an Apache torturing you to death.
    Never think for one minute these communists don’t know exactly what their doing and why.
    It’s not ignorance, it’s malicious. No one is mistaken about the facts or can’t see the whole picture.
    They see the destruction of this country, (and by extension it’s people and culture), as a win. And their willing to allow anything that brings them closer to that goal.
    You commie bitches say the law says, what you say it says?
    OK, see if you can read this, BFYTW. Come and get it.

  2. I’ve seen analysis of Justice Thomas’ opinion, that the judges in Illinois that determined that “militaristic-looking” firearms are outside the scope of 2nd Amendment protections, should be very concerned over their future in respectable law. Apparently Justice Thomas’ words are a polite but extremely pointed slap-down of their reasoning process, even as he concurred that cert should be denied.

    Make no mistake, the ONLY reason SCOTUS denied cert in this case is because of its “interlocutory state” — i.e. the state and appellate courts haven’t finished with it yet. If and when SCOTUS gets it again (because you know one party or the other will appeal it once it’s decided), Justice Thomas’ opinion will pull no punches.

  3. This is why judicial tyranny is a bad thing. No ATF involved, this is state action abetted by a circuit court seeking to nullify Bruen. The Supreme Court (less Thomas) cares more about their process than the rights of Americans. If this does get overturned, it will be years. Years in which people are denied their inalienable rights.

Comments are closed.