If 20 million illegals vote, kiss the Second Amendment goodbye.

[MDFF2008]

I don't believe Wendy Davis is pro gun not for a minute. The Texas Democratic party wants to increase gun control and she is lock step with the party.

 

[Sev89]

Wendy Davis supports open carry.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/06/wendy-davis-supports-open-carry-law/

She'll support any pro-gun law until (heaven forbid) she gets elected.

 

[El Patron Grande]

El Patron Grande says:

The Bill of Rights are the guaranteed privileges and immunities of a citizen. They cannot be revoked and, as the latest legal challenges show, attempts to "regulate" any of those rights sooner or later will fail Constitutional scrutiny.

El Patron Grande is more of a Constitutional Law expert than B. Hussein Obama will ever be!

 

[MDFF2008]

She supports open carry of RU486

 

[Vile Shadow]

The Bill of Rights are the guaranteed privileges and immunities of a citizen. They cannot be revoked and, as the latest legal challenges show, attempts to "regulate" any of those rights sooner or later will fail Constitutional scrutiny.

No, no, NO!!

The Bill of Rights are guaranteed RIGHTS, not "privileges".

Don't give these libtards ANY ground whatsoever.

 

[Docster]

El Patron Grande says:

The Bill of Rights are the guaranteed privileges and immunities of a citizen. They cannot be revoked and, as the latest legal challenges show, attempts to "regulate" any of those rights sooner or later will fail Constitutional scrutiny.

El Patron Grande is more of a Constitutional Law expert than B. Hussein Obama will ever be!

You better re-word that statement before bragging about being a better constitutional law expert than anybody......

 

[Tyeraxus]

You better re-word that statement before bragging about being a better constitutional law expert than anybody......

I think he's talking about privileges in the context of Article IV and Amendment XIV. In Corfield v. Coryell, "privileges and immunities" are equated with Rights.

The inquiry is, what are the privileges and immunities of citizens in the several states? We feel no hesitation in confining these expressions to those privileges and immunities which are, in their nature, fundamental; which belong, of right, to the citizens of all free governments; and which have, at all times, been enjoyed by the citizens of the several states which compose this Union, from the time of their becoming free, independent, and sovereign. What these fundamental principles are, it would perhaps be more tedious than difficult to enumerate. They may, however, be all comprehended under the following general heads: Protection by the government; the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety; subject nevertheless to such restraints as the government may justly prescribe for the general good of the whole.

The right of a citizen of one state to pass through, or to reside in any other state, for purposes of trade, agriculture, professional pursuits, or otherwise; to claim the benefit of the writ of habeas corpus; to institute and maintain actions of any kind in the courts of the state; to take, hold and dispose of property, either real or personal; and an exemption from higher taxes or impositions than are paid by the other citizens of the state; may be mentioned as some of the particular privileges and immunities of citizens, which are clearly embraced by the general description of privileges deemed to be fundamental: to which may be added, the elective franchise, as regulated and established by the laws or constitution of the state in which it is to be exercised. These, and many others which might be mentioned, are, strictly speaking, privileges and immunities, and the enjoyment of them by the citizens of each state, in every other state, was manifestly calculated (to use the expressions of the preamble of the corresponding provision in the old articles of confederation) "the better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states of the Union."

Just as "well-regulated" doesn't mean what modern Progressives thinks it does, "privileges" in a Constitutional sense doesn't have the same modern meaning, either.