Actually it seems to me that you are the one who is confused.
If you can provide information showing that something ruled constitutional is actually unconstitutional I’d be happy to look at it. Likewise the use of prior restraint used in a context outside the first ammendment.
Not to mention cruelty to dead animals. 
That’s not how it works.
It seems to me that calling a thing constitutional after it undergoes judicial review (and is not struck down), is entirely reasonable
Sorry … but that’s not how it works. And its unreasonable as well.
It’s just as reasonable as declaring something unconstitutional when it hasn’t been ruled as such
They didn’t call it Constitutional.
Fine. My point is that it isn’t unconstitutional
Yes it is. They rationalized it as “necessary”.
“Shall not be infringed” That is all you need to know.
They will cut!
Great. Please show where background checks have shown to be an infringement, and therefore unconstitutional,
All the big-talking, RINO, pretend Republican, spineless.
You let this happen. You let the election be stolen and sat there with never-Trump insanity, flowing in your veins, and fake know it all cowardice.
What a bunch of phonys.
Abbot, saying 'we have to stop Big-Tech censorship-----". Then saying, “GAB has no place in Texas.”
A bunch of sissy-bots.
BACKGROUND CHECK: Who did you vote for?
Its simple. Do you need the permission of the Government to speak?
Here’s how they do it. The feds make you apply for a license to own a firearm. Then they don’t bother to process the application. You sit in limbo for years. I believe that N.Y. already does this.
Not yet.
Hawaii hasn’t approved a permit in several years.
I do too.
I will not comply. Not one of MY guns will be turned in, “bought back”, destroyed, or confiscated. Not my ammo, not my gun accessories, nothing to do with my guns.
I will not surrender my rights. It will not just be taken from my cold dead hand. It will be taken over the takers dead bodies as well.
I’m not alone.
At what point do we say enough?
