Second Amendment

Illegal Aliens Have Second Amendment Rights, Says 7th Circuit Court of Appeals

But people with an "interest in eluding law enforcement" might not.


As America is riled over the rights of illegal aliens to bear native children in these United States, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ups the ante of alienfear: the law should not be able to bar them from owning or bearing weapons just because they are not citizens.

The decision comes in the case of U.S. v. Meza-Rodriguez. Excerpts with commentary from a decision from Judge Diane Wood:

Milwaukee police on August 24, 2013

responded to a report that an armed man was at a local bar. The officers obtained a surveillance video showing a man pointing an object that resembled a firearm. Witnesses later identified that man as Meza-Rodriguez. A few hours later, the same officers responded to a different report of a fight at a neighboring bar. The officers broke up the fight and recognized MezaRodriguez as the man from the surveillance video. After a foot chase, they apprehended him and patted him down. This brief search turned up a .22 caliber cartridge in his shorts pocket.

That man was Mariano Meza-Rodriguez, brought to the U.S. when he was a child by his parents but never a legitimate citizen here.

He was charged with violating federal statute 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), which makes it illegal for an alien to "possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition."

Meza-Rodriguez claims the prosecution violated his Second Amendment rights. Two lower courts denied that illegal aliens had any Second Amendment rights.

What does the 7th Circuit think? (Meza-Rodriguez was booted from the country, and that conviction would bar him from return.) Who are the "people" the Second Amendment protects, and does it include non-citizen aliens here in the States?

The Court notes what some other courts have thought about that question:

[N]either Heller nor any other Supreme Court decision has addressed the issue whether unauthorized noncitizens (or noncitizens at all) are among "the people" on whom the Amendment bestows this individual right. A few other courts of appeals have reached this issue, however, and have concluded, based on language in Heller, that the Amendment does not protect the unauthorized. See United States v. Carpio-Leon, 701 F.3d 974, 979 (4th Cir. 2012); United States v. Flores, 663 F.3d 1022, 1023 (8th Cir. 2011) (per curiam); United States v. Portillo-Munoz, 643 F.3d 437, 442 (5th Cir. 2011); see also United States v. Huitron-Guizar, 678 F.3d 1164, 1169–70 (10th Cir. 2012) (declining to reach the issue because § 922(g)(5) passes intermediate scrutiny in any case). 8 No. 14-3271

The Court decides the "people" in the Second Amendment are the same "people" as in other amendments, like the Fourth. Thus, they look at what the Supreme Court has said about the Fourth Amendment and "people" in the Verdugo-Urquidez case.

That case roughly concluded that only aliens with "substantial ties" in the U.S. could expect those constitutional protections. The Court thinks that Meza-Rodriguez qualifies. He was here voluntarily and has:

resided here from the time he arrived over 20 years ago at the age of four or five until his removal. He attended public schools in Milwaukee, developed close relationships with family members and other acquaintances, and worked (though sporadically) at various locations. This is much more than the connections our sister circuits have found to be adequate

Having a criminal record, which Meza-Rodriguez did, is not enough to bar him from having this substantial connection with the U.S. under Verdugo-Urquidez. Plyer v. Doe (1982) (a case about school funding for non citizens) is another Supreme Court case the 7th Circuit relies on to conclude that an alien can be a person with constitutional rights in the U.S.

Thus, their zinger of a conclusion on the question of, does Meza-Rodriguez or other illegal aliens have a Second Amendment right to call on? is absolutely:

In the post-Heller world, where it is now clear that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is no second-class entitlement, we see no principled way to carve out the Second Amendment and say that the unauthorized 14 No. 14-3271 (or maybe all noncitizens) are excluded. No language in the Amendment supports such a conclusion, nor, as we have said, does a broader consideration of the Bill of Rights.

The 7th Circuit has a tradition of being nicely respectful of Second Amendment rights, having in the Moore v. Madigan case in 2012 overturned complete bans on public carry in Illinois, 

But that doesn't mean everything is OK for Mr. Meza-Rodriguez.

This is one of those subtle cases where a right that the defendant was trying to assert was declared valid by the Court, but the defendant still lost his case. We saw a similar dynamic in the important 2001 case U.S. v. Emerson in the 5th Circuit that launched the modern era of Second Amendment jurisprudence explicitly recognizing an individual right in the amendment that resulted in the important Heller decision.

There as well the right was upheld but the defendant found guilty anyway, more or less because the Court could see a pro-government loophole in the right.

In this case, the Court concluded, well, of course, while he has a Second Amendment right, no right is absolute and that:

Congress's interest in prohibiting persons who are difficult to track and who have an interest in eluding law enforcement is strong enough to support the conclusion that 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5) does not impermissibly restrict Meza-Rodriguez's Second Amendment right to bear arms. We thus AFFIRM the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss.

It strikes me (not a lawyer) that the fine distinction the Court drew here might not make much difference, since surely in most cases it could be argued that nearly by definition an illegal alien might have that characteristic of being "difficult to track" and with "an interest in eluding law enforcement."

In fact, that can apply to all sort of citizens as well so I hope Congress never chooses to pass a law making it illegal to own a gun if you don't want to be talked to by cops for whatever reason.

Legal scholar Josh Blackman has this speculation about the case, after spelling out as per the case that "Judge Wood parted company with the 4th, 5th, 8th, and 10th Circuits" with the aliens-can-have-Second-Amendment-rights holding and thus created a point ripe for Supreme Court consideration:

Will the government seek certiorari here? It's a close call. They won on the underlying issue, but lost on the question of the applicability of the 2nd Amendment. Such a ruling opens up other possible 2nd Amendment challenges by resident aliens who cannot bear arms. This could be the first time the federal government has petitioned for cert on a 2nd Amendment case since Heller itself!

NEXT: How Many Law Enforcement Officials Does It Take to Explain Their Legal Privileges?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Huh. A ruling like might almost lead someone to believe that the Bill of Rights mostly defines and constrains what Congress can do rather than hand out party favors based on who issued your birth certificate.

    1. While I don’t disagree with your premise that the constitution was more meant as a constraint on government than anything else, I’m not sure I agree that the BoR covers non-citizens. Specifically, the wording of 2A indicates (1) militia and (2) the people. Both of those seem to imply citizenship.

      It would make exactly zero sense for the BoR to implicitly allow state X to send over a hundred thousand heavily armed visa-holders and just take the country over from within, so I doubt 2A extends that right to non-citizens.

      There are other rights that the constitution doesn’t extend to aliens. Voting would be a good example for the same reasoning used above.

      1. Does an illegal alien have a right to a fair trial if tried in the US? Does a tourist from another country? Do they have the right to assemble peaceably?

        The BoR was written before there was any concept of “illegal alien”. It refers to, essentially, anyone who is on US-controlled soil. People who emigrated to the US gained these rights the instant they stepped off the boat.

        As for things that are not extended to aliens, that is *explicitly* stated (unless I recall incorrectly). No where, whatsoever, does the 2nd Amendment say a damn thing about whether it has to do with only citizens or not. And in that case, let’s go to the 9th: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. In other words, if it wasn’t explicitly stated, you should assume the widest possible interpretation.

        1. Whether the people refers to citizens or anybody subject to US jurisdiction is is up for debate.

          My reasoning above regarding why we may not want to extend 2A rights to foreign nationals still stands. It’s basically a loophole for an enemy nation to infiltrate and take over from within, without all that nasty beach-landing hassle.

          1. So let me get this straight: you would prefer to reduce the liberty of the people in the US on the minuscule chance that–and let me make sure I’ve got this clear–some “enemy nation” will take over the US by…uh…sending in…uh…uh…sleeper agents or something, and they will…uh…win? being legally allowed to own firearms?

            This is an amazing taking of pants-shitting to an incredible new level. Congratulations, I’m impressed.

            1. Possible Tulpa?

              1. Nah. And I think Tulpa would be constitutionally incapable of making a screen name without a capital letter in it.

              2. No, no. I’m very willing to (and am right now) lose this argument.

                And seriously, getting called a troll by the dude who equated Downs kids with dogs in an earlier thread?

                1. Not kids. Fetuses.

                  1. Let’s go back in time, shall we?

                    Cytotoxic|8.24.15 @ 3:18PM|#|?|filternamelinkcustom

                    And here we have the perfect symbol of the pro-life anti-choice movement as well as its end game: forcing retarded offspring on parents. Disgusting. They are sacrificing real people (the would-be mothers) for something not more human than a dog. A retarded, aneuploidy-ridden dog.

                    I think it’s pretty clear, given the references to “offspring” and, of course, the retarded dog that you, also in light of your.. unorthodox views on the applicability of the right to choose, are, in fact, talking about kids.

                    Just my take, but I could be wrong.

                    1. That doesn’t change my point. I didn’t equate kids to dogs, just fetuses, but it has the same horrible endgame.

            2. It’s a hypothetical. Far-fetched? Yeah, sure.
              *dons tinfoil hat*
              But seriously, would you put it past any country on this earth to attempt something that ridiculous?

              1. If it’s ridiculous, then there’s no point violating anyone’s rights to prevent it from happening.

              2. Uh, no country on this earth would even think of trying something that stupid*. Let’s see, trying to mass infiltrate the most militarily powerful country on the planet with–how many could they assemble?–enough sleeper agents to actually make a difference against one of the most armed civilian populations on the planet, let alone the militia of that country. Uh huh. Sounds like a fucking genius plan.

                * Well, maybe North Korea if they possibly could (which they can’t), but that’s because it’s run by an insane troll.

                1. WOLVERINES!!!!

                  1. Oh my god, it CAN happen here! AVENGE ME, BOYS!!! AVENGE ME!!!

                    By the way, did you see the remake? Oh. My. God. They have tanks…drifting. Like Tokyo street racers. I am shitting you not.

                    1. I absolutely refused to see that. The idea of it alone was a crime against my childhood.

                    2. I had to do it. I did it with my cousins who used to watch the original with me when we were kids. We took a bunch of Tramadol, had a few beers, and then…well, is there another way to express “that was actually even worse than my insanely low expectations”?

                    3. Has Hollywood ever re-made an iconic movie and measured up to the original? I can’t think of one off the top.

                    4. There have been moderately good ones here and there. I can’t think of any stellar ones off the top of my head. I mean, the whole idea of remaking an iconic movie can only come from 1) a studio exec who just sees dollar signs in the name recognition, which I get even if I hate it, and 2) an arrogant director who, for some inexplicable reason, wants to take something they loved as a kid and…uh…I…remake it or something? (Peter Jackson, I’m looking at you, buddy.)

                    5. FWIW I think the remakes of The Thing and Invasion of the Body Snatchers were significantly better than the originals.

                    6. The Thing remake was much, much better. The Invasion of the Body Snatchers remake was “just as good” as the original. That’s high praise for the remake as the original is a masterpiece.

                    7. I went to see Mad Max Fury Road Saturday at dollar theater well 3.50 for 3D. It was pretty awesome actually. I guess not really a remake though.

                    8. It was absolutely not a remake. And I liked it a lot myself.

                    9. Charlize was perfect.

                    10. The Wizard of Oz and The Maltese Falcon were remakes, but I grant the earlier versions weren’t “iconic.”

                    11. I watched a large part of it. It sucked.

                    12. FYI = the “Cytotoxic rule about movies” remains amazingly accurate.

                    13. I absolutely refused to see that. The idea of it alone was a crime against my childhood.

                      Good call.

                      The Powers Boothe character, Tanner, wasn’t even a fighter pilot.

                      Just sad.

                2. Yeah, you’ve got me on this. And now I’m stuck imagining how a DPRNK infiltration/takeover attempt would go down for the rest of the night.

                3. Yeah those Russians sure were stupid settling all those ethnic Russians in the Crimea. They all became flag waving Ukrainians overnight, no way were they still loyal to Russia, nope didn’t happen nope.

                  1. You are seriously going to pick up that fallen battle-flag?

                  2. Wait a second…are you seriously trying to equate an aggressive imperial conquering nation that actively deposits its own citizens in large numbers in conquered states (which they also tried to do in Estonia) in order to flood in their own people…with people coming to the US to try and make some money or have a better life?

                    Oh shit wait…please tell me you think the Mexican government is actively sending people in to the US to eventually conquer it. Oh please please please, you will make my fucking day.

                    1. Oh please please please, you will make my fucking day.

                      The Comming Illegal Immigrant Conquest is like the Godwin of immigration threads on at least a few of the right wing sites I cruise. Never fails.

                    2. Just pointing out that having a large number of people migrate into an area, who remain loyal to their home country can cause a lot of trouble for the host country.

                      Do you disagree? Agree? or are you just going to type something stupid like “They took our jerbs!” because I haven’t heard that one before.

                    3. Oh no, I won’t be saying anything about jerbs. You’ve proven yourself, here and below, to be far too stupid and obsessed to continue to interact with. Have fun with your sputtering outrage over the horrible filthy foreigners; it bores the shit out of me, frankly.

                    4. This is exactly what I’m talking about you never actually respond to anything someone actually types, you never give it a single thought, you just repeat the same old tired memes over and over. Nobody said anything about “filthy Immigrants” you dishonest lying little fuck.

                    5. Nobody said anything about “filthy Immigrants” you dishonest lying little fuck.

                      You did, you stupid fucking idiot. Where do you morons come from? Why are you here? Did Facebook lead you here? Did you see the morons who post on the reason Facebook page and say, “Self, I’m really fucking stupid and these morons are really fucking stupid. Gee whiz, this looks like a dandy place to be a fucking idiot!” Is that what happened? Well fuck off, you unwashed mouthbreathing weaselfucking sack of shit.

                    6. When did I say “filthy immigrants”? When did I insult immigrants? Fucking fanatics I swear, you people hear only what you want to hear and nothing else.

                    7. Why the fuck are you here? You’re a gigantic moron and you’re moronically angry about nothing because you’re a fucking moron. You don’t need to tell us about how giant of a moron you are. Fuck off, moron.

                    8. No response, no thoughts, just insults. Do you honestly think people reading this think you’re the smart one? I’m being attacked for saying something I never said, in a thread where anybody can read what was typed.

                    9. You are nothing but a fucking juvenile asshole.

                    10. Just pointing out that having a large number of people migrate into an area, who remain loyal to their home country can cause a lot of trouble for the host country.

                      The US has ~320 million people in it. Most countries would literally have to depopulate their entire country in order to be able to pull off something like Russia did with vastly-smaller, relatively underpopulated bordering states.

                    11. Yeah, because all those New Yorkers are going to run to the aid of Nevada volutarily.

                    12. Are you off your meds? Who is going to live in the fucking desert again? Why is it you think the MEXICAN RED DAWN scenario needs to be prepared for when we have 12 million ‘illegal mexicans’ in the US who still haven’t managed to carve out so much as a independent Barrio

                    13. who remain loyal to their home country

                      Define this, and provide an estimate of how many such people you think are here.

                    14. And no, rooting for El Tri over Team USA – as annoying as that can be – doesn’t count.

                    15. Why is it that MEChA uses only English, the language of their gringo oppressors, on their official website (with the exception of a sprinkling of Spanish terms- not enough to call it Spanglish)?

                  3. Yeah those Russians sure were stupid settling all those ethnic Russians in the Crimea. They all became flag waving Ukrainians overnight, no way were they still loyal to Russia, nope didn’t happen nope.

                    “Attention, mi amigos! Today you, thousands, millions strong, embark on our glorious quest to quietly invade America. Go forth, muchachos, go forth from your squalid homes here in wonderful Mexico, go forth from poverty, go forth from drug cartels who behead people in the streets! Go to vile America, find jobs, earn money, raise children–many children! And then, someday soon, we will conquer America and make it just like Mexico is today!

                    “WHO’S WITH ME???”

                  4. You realize Russia didn’t take over Crimea by moving Russians into an independent Ukraine? Russians colonized the place while it was a part of the Russian Empire, that’s not even remotely the same situation (also, Crimea was never really historically ethnically Ukrainian – not to say Russia’s actions recently were/are justified).

              3. Well technically the Visigoths and Anglo-Saxons were just immigrants originally…

                1. Oh wow he’s going Full Retard on this one.

                  1. Don’t you have some Down syndrome kid to go kick?

                    1. I don’t kick them. I let the other orphans kick him.

            3. Is your objection to his idea about what the law should be, or about what it is?

              1. PS The remake of “True Grit” with Jeff Bridges is MUCH better than the orig with John Wayne. Much. Better. Even with MATT DAMON! MATT. DAMON.

                1. PS The remake of “True Grit” with Jeff Bridges is MUCH better than the orig with John Wayne

                  You shut your whore mouth!

                2. I will grant True Grit. Good example.

                3. While the Bridges version was completely enjoyable, you need to go light yourself on fire for comparing anything with MAAAATT DAAAMUN in it to anything the Duke did.


      2. At the time of the Constitutions drafting could a foreign national join a state militia? The bill of rights prohibited the government from violating certain human rights within the boundaries of the United States. These rights are universal, not mere privileges associated with citizenship (as with voting.)

      3. So immigrants don’t count as people?

        1. the people is not the same thing as simply “people”. See the link above.

      4. There are other rights that the constitution doesn’t extend to aliens.

        BoR, not Constitution. “Congress shall make no law infringing the right…” implies that the right exists outside of and prior to the Constitution. Since the Constitution is the foundational document of the US, these rights Congress cannot infringe upon must have belonged to the people before they were US citizens, before there was even a US to be a citizen of. This fits with Jefferson’s contention that “all men” are created equal and endowed with certain inalienable rights, not just all the Americans. Under a universal reading of the Declaration and the BoR, all people have the same rights we do, but their governments infringe upon those rights and keep their citizens from exercising them. But just because their governments don’t recognize the rights is no excuse for the US government to refuse to recognize them. How else are we justified in condemning China for not allowing free speech, for example, unless we believe our BoR rights are human rights and not just American rights? And how does the government get away with the shit they do with the argument that the Constitution doesn’t apply to foreigners? Their governments fuck them so we’re going to pile on and fuck them, too?

    2. That can’t possibly be right, Hugh. Just think what it would mean. It would suggest some kind of…universal moral principle…noooooooooooooooooooooooooo

  2. How was this ever even a question? Rights are not granted to us by the government.

    1. In theory, yes. But note: There as well the right was upheld but the defendant found to be guilty anyway, more or less because the Court could see a pro-government loophole in the right.

    2. I’m pretty sure the government does not agree with you on that, broheim.

      1. They don’t

  3. Hey 7th circuit, how about making it legal for me to keep and bear arms in California?

    1. I don’t think they can help you with that. Give the 9th Circuit a try.

      1. All options are on the table

        1. Careful with that wording…

        2. Is that woodchipper?

      2. If the 7th court issues a ruling in conflict with the 9th, it would force a Supreme Court challenge.

    2. And how about making it legal for a citizen to purchase and take possession of a handgun in a state which is not their primary residence? I spent a month in Montana this year (no sales tax) and could’ve gotten a great deal on a P320 in Billings.

      1. Every sane person knows this, yet the leftards keep the meme going that “people from state X can go across the border into state Y and buy guns, which is why there is so much gun crime in my otherwise progressive paradise state X” bullshit without getting called out on it by every media outlet they peddle it to. Maybe if that were reported on honestly, more gun rights would be reinforced across the country and the pants-shitting anti-gun clowns would recede into the darkness where they belong.

    3. Now that would be an epic gerrymander.

  4. Donald Trump winning in the all important Ass-Clown demographic.

    Rep. Peter King Praises Trump: ‘He Talks Like a Real Person’

    1. Well, when you’re an Ass Clown, it really helps in winning that demographic.

      1. I heard King on Fox News earlier today saying the way to,defeat ISIS is to send our troops over there and be less concerned with collateral damage when we bomb people.

        That guy is a real piece of shit.

        1. Unfortunately he may be right about ISIS. There is no ‘clean way’. Mind you, ISIS doesn’t have to be destroyed, they just have to be turned back into another piss-ant insurgency like the dozens of other piss-ant Islamist insurgencies in that area.

          Here’s a great idea: just clone the Kurds. Make a Kurd Clone Army. Hell, make America’s army one composed of Kurd Clones. Damn I’m good.

          1. He was basically calling for indiscriminate bombing of areas controlled by ISIS. Anybody that would condone that is either insane or retarded.

            1. You are replying to Cytotoxic, sloop..

            2. If that were a requirement to defeating ISIS, opposing it would be insane and retarded. But I don’t see how that would defeat ISIS very efficiently or even at all. The ISIS is here, here, and here. So bomb those places. A few days ago that’s what killed their #2 (MERICA FUCK YEAR).

              1. Yeah, because unless we defeat them they will…what? No chance they take over an industrialized area of any country.

                Sorry, but we shouldn’t give up our moral superiority in order to let you stroke your anti-Islamic war boner.

                1. Did you hear about those Bolsheviks in Russia? I’m not worried. Let them have their own state they can’t hurt us. /Sloopyin1918.

                  Your capacity to not learn from history is astounding. Here’s a trend: wherever Islamists take over, they use that place to attack our freedoms. Doing whatever it takes to defeat them and preserve our freedoms does not relinquish our moral superiority, it IS our moral superiority.

                  This is the correct opinion on the Islamist war. All conflicting opinions are wrong.

                  They have lots of excellent stuff there. So excellent.

                  1. Our war policies have been so successful in the last half century. We should do more of it!

                    1. Um…in the big picture, some of them have been pretty good. Cold War over: good guys won.

                      Then again, if you actually read and comprehended the link, you’d know I and my fellow travelers are deeply unhappy with US policies that treat state sponsors of terror like Iran with kid gloves instead of ending them, and sabotage America’s military efforts with asinine ROEs.

                    2. As I see, history allows two choices that might obtain reasonably acceptable end states:

                      1) Annihilate Islamism. Fire bomb it ala Dresden and Tokyo, and then nuke it for good measure. Do something equivalent to letting the Russians rape eastern German. Utterly destroy Islamic culture like the US did to Shintoism.

                      2) Isolate Islamism. Shut it off from the civilized world. Cease trade and technology transfers. Allow only such travel as necessary for a modicum of diplomacy and for bona fide refugees. Make Islamism a pariah.

                      Problem is that our so-called leaders speak of Islam as the religion of peace, and seek to accommodate the insanity of its most orthodox interpretation.

                2. ISIS already runs industries in what was once Syria and Iraq.

            3. That’s how you win wars.
              Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima…

          2. OMG what about an army of Kurd Clones and Jews and GURKHA! My ingenuity feeds on itself.

            1. Gurkha … What’s a prisoner? What’s a civilian?

          3. Were you onboard also when we created these good terrorists, Cyto? You gonna vote for Hillary, bro?

            1. America created those terrorists.

              1. Should be a question mark at the end.

                America did not create ISIS. Those people existed long before.

                1. No, but America supplied them with arms.

              2. No retard, the terrorists themselves created the terrorists. Ever heard of personal responsibility? Killing is a personal choice, and the Middle East’s problem is that many of their cultures reward savage aggression over thinking, and it’s a been a long standing trend.

                Steal, rape, beat, gore, kill, behead, Admiral Akbar, repeat.

                Americans have never had the same cultural appetite for war, and then when they happen the incessant bitching starts immediately “when will the violence stop”. Pussy has equal rights here, so pussies are protected. If we only protected dicks and assholes, there would be no brakes on the American war machine.

                We should have a zero tolerance policy for those who don’t protect pussy, it’s in everyone’s best interest for us to curb stomp any society that goes that extra step to harm pussy. Because if you’re going to be a dick, be a nice big dick, not some horrible little hairy smelly prick.

                1. “Steal, rape, beat, gore, kill, behead, Admiral Akbar, repeat.”

                  Waitaminit! Did you actually just blame Islamic terrorism on this guy:


                  …and then formulate U.S. foreign policy based on the speech from “Team America”?

                  That was epic, and you clearly have a home here at

    2. I know that I call people “loser” on a daily basis.

    3. I think you mentioned the terrorist demographic, not the ass-clown demographic.

    4. ”He Talks Like a Real Person”

      who the hell is peter king hanging out with that he thinks this?

      1. New Yorkers. You know how you can tell if somebody is a true New Yorker like Trump and King? Ask them about Jersey and they’ll dismiss Jersey as the suburban part of NYC where all the retards live. The entire rest of the planet knows that NYC is where all the people too retarded to live in Jersey are sent. All these “Trumpisms” I keep hearing about? Yeah, that’s how every fucking douchebag in Jersey talks.

        1. You know King is from Long Island, right? (Hint: suburban NYC.)

          1. It’s cute when New Yorkers get all provincial about their few acres of dogshit.

            You should be ashamed to come from either NY or NJ. It means your ancestors were too repugnantly backwards, scared or weak to venture westward.

            1. Or, maybe they weren’t losers who had to leave their loser lives behind and head into the wilderness because they couldn’t be successful back east in civilization.

      2. The Real IRA?

    5. Peter King has to be one of the biggest prick assholes on the planet. I don’t think I’ve ever heard him speak any other language than asshole moron.

      1. Doesn’t he speak Gaelic so he can communicate with his early terrorist buddies?

        1. Same language. Different dialect.

  5. So now illegals are the only ones who have 2nd amendment rights?

    1. In California, that’s probably close to true.*

      *Except for political pals and celebrities.

  6. So Illegal aliens now have 2nd amendment rights, but New Yorkers can go fuck themselves.

    Seems odd we would extended those rights to illegal aliens, before restoring them to citizens.

    1. It’s a step in the right direction at least.

    2. This ruling is one more chink taken out of the wall of obfuscation that local governments use to block people’s ability to posses and carry firearms. Because it extends the idea that it is a universal right. This ruling can only help future attempts to take down NYC’s and Chicago’s and CA’s terrible gun laws.

      So what the fuck are you whining about, exactly?

      1. I believe they are concerned about a MexicanInvasion using guns purchased at American gun shops.

        1. But the ATF has already handled that by supplying the guns. So what the fuck are they whining about, exactly?

          1. Hordes of criminal illegal immigrants murdering the white womenz and being all immigrant-y

            1. Where the white women at?

            2. Epi brings up chinks and now you’re talking about hordes? We’re talking about the Messkins here! Let’s focus on one group of non-Whites at a time, people! We can get to the Orientals later.

          2. Look Epi, you’ve obviously never seen Desperado. Do you really want your gardener or the guy at the taquiera down the street to have access to that kind of firepower knowing that they are all unstoppable badasses?

            1. I’m gonna be honest with you, Hugh. I preferred El Mariachi.

              1. You do realize that Desperado had Antonio Banderas and Salma Hayek, right?

                1. I am aware of that. But I can see her in another Rodriguez movie that has vampires and isn’t essentially a higher-budget remake of El Mariachi, no matter how much Rodriguez wants to pretend it’s a different part of his trilogy. I mean, Sam Raimi doesn’t try to piss down your back and say it’s raining by claiming Evil Dead II is anything more than a higher budget remake of Evil Dead, does he?

                  1. Right. And like EDII, Desperado is a better version of what was essentially an audition tape.

                    Now, if you want to talk about immigrants walking around with too much freedom, look what happens when you give Robert Rodriguez free rein: Machete Kills.

                    1. Now, if you want to talk about immigrants walking around with too much freedom, look what happens when you give Robert Rodriguez free rein: Machete Kills.

                      I paid cash to watch that, so I am with you 100%

                  2. Transylvania 6-5000 vs. Evil Dead vs. House steel cage match. Who wins?

                    1. Dude, this had better not be a serious question.

                    2. Why not? I can never decide between the first two, really. Though I admit that my movie taste cannot be trusted, most likely, as I prefer the prequel Star Wars movies over the originals.

                    3. Attack of the Clones
                      Revenge of the Sith
                      The Empire Strikes Back
                      The Phantom Menace
                      A New Hope
                      Return of the Jedi

                    4. I’m confused

                    5. Are you trolling DWT?

                    6. No I am just a twisted, unholy person.

                    7. I didn’t think anyone could have worst taste in movies than Cytotoxic, but you managed to pull it off.

                    8. Evidently. I respect that.

      2. Uh that illegal immigrants have more rights then actual citizens?? I’m sure you can understand that.

        Oh who am I kidding this is an immigration thread so naturally you guys go full retard almost immediately.

        1. “Oh who am I kidding this is an immigration thread so naturally you guys go full retard almost immediately.”

          Don’t worry, we’re not gonna take ur job. Unlike those damn immigrants.

        2. That’s funny considering you’re the one who brought it up and seemed much more concerned about there being illegals involved than about its implication towards increased application of the 2nd Amendment.

          But hey, you pretend that it’s not you obsessing about illegals even though you’re the one who went there, completely unprompted. No, it’s everyone else. Of course it is.

          1. You know what? Just fuck off. If you don’t understand why someone would be offended by the idea of illegal aliens having more rights then citizens, then it’s because you’re nothing but a lying dishonest little shit.

            1. That’s an excellent response to my pointing out that you’re the one obsessed with illegals. It doesn’t support my point at all. Nope.

              And if you think this gives illegals more rights than citizens, all I can do is laugh at you. I mean, you’re not even fucking worthy of consideration. You’re just an idiot.

            2. more rights



                What do you think P.F. Chang’s is?

                You big dummy!

                1. You big dummy!

                  I thought that was going to be a link to Butters shooting someone in the dick.

        3. Do you actually believe that? Lmao

    3. Can’t get no gun unless you’re an illegal alien.

    4. Shall not be infringed.

      I haven’t been able to find the part that says ‘but we need common sense gun control, and because the children, and how can anyone be against common sense gun control, and because the children’.

      I really cannot find that part, maybe a sincere leftist can help me find it.

      1. A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

        The third word! It says it right there in the amendment that guns should be regulated!

        /prog derp

        (Yes, that’s exactly what my prog friends say.)

        1. Oh, good God:

          In “The five extra words that can fix the Second Amendment”, John Paul Stevens suggests revising the 2A to:

          A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.

          That’s almost like suggesting revising it to:

          A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Military shall not be infringed.

          1. Yes, I suppose there’s more than one definition for “fixing” something. Like fixing a deck in one’s favor, for example.

          2. I love the idiocy of that revision. Yes, because the government needed to be restrained from taking guns away from the enforcement arm of the government.

  7. That man was Mariano Meza-Rodriguez, brought to the U.S. when he was a child…

    Could you be more specific? Here in America a person is a child until age 26. Also, whycome illegal aliens are more keen to maintain 2nd Amendment rights than many citizens? That don’t seem right.

    1. Four or five years old, according to the Court’s decision.

  8. You know the conspiracy theorist “fema concentration camp” crowd is going to nuts over this ruling.

    1. It’ll be fun to watch.

    2. I’m looking forward to it making rounds on the right side of the internet. The conflicting impulse gun rights v. dirty immigrants ought to be amusing.

      1. “Government is taking our guns, but arming illegal Mexicans!”

        Should be a showcase of delightful, rational conversation for sure. Extra joyful if Trumpy-Trump gets on the talking point.

        1. I think we are getting it on this very thread, in fact.

          1. Oh, we most certainly are.

            1. I’m leaning Tulpa here.

              1. Whitney Houston was SACRIFICED by the ILLUMINATI for the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth!

                WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

                1. ISS Hoax – The International Space Station Does Not Exist!

                  The International Space Station, just like everything else brought to us by NASA, is a Freemasonic hoax, a complete fabrication done with special effects, models, pools, zero G planes, and various camera tricks.

                  WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

                  1. The JEWS are shapeshifting ALIEN LIZARD PEOPLE!

                    WAKE UP GOYIM!

    3. That’s you, right? It’s a really stupid thing to believe, and you’re a huge fucking idiot. So you believe in it, right? Fuck you. Idiot.

  9. We’re not talking about banning immigrants, we just need some common sense immigrant-control.

    1. Nobody needs more than 10 immigrants.

      1. Well I’m not giving up mine

        1. All my immigrants are big and black and scary looking with the thing that goes up, too.

          1. But are they taking our white wimmins?

    2. but who will build the roads?

  10. This seems like it has the potential to be the Republican presidential primary equivalent of Captain Kirk telling a genocidal alien super computer, “This statement is false.”

  11. Ooohh so it’s possible for America’s 10 million illegal immigrants to arm themselves? Just try to deport that.

    1. Ah Cytotoxic. Mr. Blow up every fucking Muslim in the Middle east as possible, but let as many of them immigrate to the United States as possible, and just for shits and giggles arm them when they get here.

      1. I love the smell of burning strawmen in the morning.

        1. Do you or do you not support an aggressive approach to the War on Terror?

          Do you or do you not support open borders?

          Do you or do you not support illegal immigrants arming themselves?

          1. Have you or haven’t you conflated two separate issues as being morally and substantively identical?

    2. Once upon a time in the West, Mexico tried to deport a bunch of heavily armed illegal immigrants. That did not work out so well. Or it worked out great, depending on your perspective.

      1. I’m sure we’ll be fine.

      2. They thought opening their northern border to yankee settlers would put additional pressure on the Apaches in the region they were having trouble with. Well at least they didn’t have to worry about the Apaches anymore…

  12. /places John-bait

    The security researcher who hacked into a moving Jeep earlier this year has resigned as an engineer at Twitter Inc (TWTR.N) after three years on the job, a person familiar with the matter said.

    1. I am pretty sure this story has John and millions of other team red members hacking up foam. They also got blood coming out of their eyes and, wherever.

      1. Don’t you have some mentally handicapped kids to call retarded dogs somewhere?

        1. Fetuses. Aneuploidy-stricken fetuses.

      2. …explain to me why this is a partisan issue. Explain it to me like it’s retarded. Because it is.

  13. “Guns don’t kill people, illegals do.”

    “No, illegals don’t kill people, guns do.”

    Ban both, just to be safe.

  14. Prolly makes more sense allowing everyone access to legal guns than providing incentives for a black market in arms run by the drug cartels that would make the illegal drug trade look like girl scout cookie sales. Although it would be cool to have an RPG.

    1. RPG? Commie!

      Bazooka or go home!


      1. I’m all out of bubblegum

  15. Holeeee shit.

    It’s as if a million progressive voices cried out, and then were silenced.

    1. Like this?…..t-t-shirt/

  16. The ruling that made both Socon and Prog heads explode

    1. The good news is, I, a red-blooded, corn-fed ‘murrican boy can’t “bear” arms without further permission from the state, over and above and 2nd amendment considerations. (aside: this, I’m told is racist).

      So if you’re an illegal alien, not sure how you’re going to get that second layer of permission.

      1. As a NY’r, i believe i suffer from similar restrictions.

        but i still think every mexican should be handed a bandolier and an Mosin upon arrival, as is their due.

    2. The video That made PETSA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Stuffed Animals) heads explode.

      1. Poor kid

        1. His future doesn’t hold much promise, does it.

          1. He’s fucked. It’s sad. The girls have it even worse.

    3. Not if the Socons believe in natural rights and/or are 2A absolutists.

      1. I doubt many think Mexican border-hoppers deserve equal treatment under the BoR

        1. This very issue came up back when Larry Pratt of GOA opposed the ACLU and NRA on carry rights for legal resident aliens. He almost lost a significant chunk of the membership before he backpedaled. I recall following the issue in more God-fearing, constitutional conservative, paleocon quarters and the 2A absolutists and natural rights-adherents were adamantly arguing, to great success, that even illegal aliens had the natural right ,as handed down by the Creator, to keep and bear arms.

          1. Regardless of the Constitution and Federal law, several states have (had) laws that specifically bar aliens/non-citizens from owning firearms. Other states will allow ownership but will not issue CCW permits to non-citizens.

            1. Washington State appears to be the only one on that list that denies firearm rights outright to foreign nationals. Page is quite a mess. It seems to confuse resident and citizen. Non-citizen state residents are good in most of them.

              My point again, is that anyone who recognizes a universal right to bearing arms for self defense (most “gun nut”) would think that foreign nationals should be able to exercise that right under US law. Back when the GOA flap was current much of the knee jerk “illegal aliens don’t have the same rights” fell apart with a little prompting to think about the principles involved.

  17. “A large group of armed irregulars being a vital pretext to form a tyranny, the right of foreign nationals to bear arms on US soil shall not be infringed”

    1. …what?

      1. It’s the new progressive 2A.

        1. You forgot the part where it only applies to union members with badges.

  18. Looks like the alleged author of the Ron Paul newsletters wasn’t so fleet of foot when the law caught up with his driving-on-a-suspended-license ass.

  19. The rights in the American constitution aren’t given by government. They are specifically highlighted as examples of what cannot be taken away, and they were not meant to be all inclusive.

    A court decision that says an amendment ‘bestows’ rights is a fucking disgrace in the first place.

    An illegal alien, an American, it doesn’t fucking matter. The rights are supposed to be inalienable.

    1. Except an illegal alien should just be deported as soon as he’s apprehended.

  20. THIS. This is what I mean by mouthbreathers. TEAM RED idiots who are too fucking stupid to understand why they’re pissed, but by Autofellating Jesus H Christ, they’re going to tell you how pissed they are A HUNDRED FUCKING TIMES IN A TREAD.

    Why are their butts so hurt? What brings them here? Is it my fault? Have I not insulted them enough?

    1. Are you sure that one isn’t a Tulpa-sock? It seems to be aggressively trolling.

      1. That’s got to be a Kennedy

    2. Kinda like the guy who will go on and on about government spending but their number one issue is that people on welfare should be tested for drugs EVEN while acknowledging that it would cost way more money than any potential cuts in benefits because fuck those people. Or the guy that will agree with every point on the failure of the war on drugs and it’s negative impact on civil rights, but the war must continue because drugs are bad mkay?

    3. You come in here do a drive-by on nonsensical insults, refuse to actually have a conversation with anybody, and somehow everyone else is the idiot?

      What pisses me off is every fucking time anybody says something even remotely negative about illegal immigration half the posters on here go full retard.

      The last immigration article I posted in was one where they called illegal immigrants natural libertarians, I said that was bullshit and if it were true how did California turn into a socialist basket case? I was immediately accused of blaming socialism on immigrants, called racist, nativist, and of course heard plenty of that oh so original “they took our jerbs.”

      This thread is exactly the same. If you don’t understand why someone would be offended by the notion of illegal immigrants having more rights then citizens, then you are either a dishonest lying shit, or a complete idiot.

      1. There are a lot of pie-in-the-sky type libertarians here, who think the NAP means open borders and what have you.
        In reality, an anarcho-capitalist society that uses the NAP as the basis for security and arbitration would have slavery and indentured labor.

        1. “an anarcho-capitalist society that uses the NAP as the basis for security and arbitration would have slavery and indentured labor”

          I bet you think of yourself as exceptionally smart, too. Dunning-Kruger is a bitch.

          1. You really want to hear how he would square that circle? Man, GILMORE, you got a high tolerance to derp.

      2. “how did California turn into a socialist basket case?”

        When was California NOT a socialist basket case, again?

      3. illegal immigrants having more rights then citizens

        ^ why you are being called an idiot.

        US citizens’ (per your example, New Yorkers’) gun rights suffer not because the courts say they don’t have Second Amendment rights, but because the courts interpret the Second Amendment as being subject to many exceptions. If the Second Amendment does not apply to you, you are deemed to have no gun rights at all; if the Second Amendment does apply to you, then you have gun rights subject to exactly the same set of exceptions.

        Hence this ruling puts illegal immigrants on an equal footing, at least in Seventh Circuit (which, by the way, does not contain New York, making it a poor example).


      1. Spines in the DoomCock of Doom could hurt your feet?

  21. I can’t be the ONLY one here who misread that title here as the case of U.S. v. Mega-Rodriguez and suddenly imagined the most timely of all Syfy movies…

    “President Trump, he’s just too big! We can’t built a wall tall enough to stop him from crossing the border!”


  22. If I am reading this correctly, the court is saying that Mexicans can schtup my wife at gunpoint, and that I have to watch?

    1. I believe the court has ordered you to turn your white women into the nearest minority sex fiends, yes. #cuckservative

      1. Look, we’ll let you watch, okay?

        Actually, you’re required to watch.

        1. Yokels of Gor

        2. you’re required to watch.

          As long as I can set up the ol’ camcorder to show my cuckservative buddies, I am in.

          1. God, please let’s not spread that ridiculous word.

      2. SugarFree coined the term for us: #cosmocuckian. Get it right.

      3. Is that why you’re insulting people? Afraid border control might put a stop to your cuckhold porn?

        1. Why do you want brown people to take my woman?

  23. As a foreign mouthbreater, I’m sure that the pro-arming illegal immigrant crowd won’t mind if I land on the California coast with, say, 100 000 well armed “Dreamers” and establish a “community.”

    1. We already dealt with this. Summary: you’re retarded.

    2. Anything this dumb is obvious trolling. The sad thing is, though, a lot of the GOP tough guys on the right live their lives in fear of the most ridiculous, minuscule threats. Or even crazy ones that only exist in their twisted heads.

      1. Yeah, like no country has ever invaded another.

        You retarded freaks have never seen your cities bombed to rubble, or watched foreign troops rape and pillage their way across the land, and, as a result, you think it will never happen, and therefore think preparing for it is stupid. Until you actually form effective militias or security organizations, you’re stuck with the state, and eroding the state’s power without building your own power base will only invite disaster.


        1. Doesn’t giving more people the option to arm themselves erode the state’s power?

          1. I thought that is the utopian desire of the common libertarian, to erode state’s power.

        2. “You retarded freaks have never seen your cities bombed to rubble, or watched foreign troops rape and pillage their way across the land…”

          oooh oooh, i know this one…. troop ships on fires off the belt of orion….. all these memories ……. tears in rain… then you release the Dove…. Epic man. Epic.

          What the fuck were you saying about mexicans? Did they not mow your lawn this week?

          1. Mexico for the Mexicans!


            You really are an asshole.

            1. Right…. so, it was mexicans what bombed london? CRIKEY. Well I’m just glad you’ve got the polish to rebuild your country for you. What with the brits being such lazy socialist fucks who sold all their industry to the germans and arabs. Sad, really, you should feel compelled to complain about Americans. We don’t need the help, thanks very much! Cheerio

              1. Yeah, America always rebuilds the bad guys, Germany and japan in this case.

                1. HERBLE GERBLE DERBLE

                  Do you ever fucking make a point and stick to it, or just blather at random? I was trying to follow you for a minute but you’re too dumb to even be useful for mockery purposes

            2. I say give mexico back to the irish, oh wait, that may not be right, damn american skool sistim.

          2. I think he was talking about Wolf 359

        3. How delusional do you have to be to think that Mexico is going to invade the US by sending hordes of illegal immigrants who only have guns because of this court decision?

          1. Delusional, or so crazy is just might work?

          2. Yea, the cartels inside the southern borders will not let that happen.

        4. Well I think we know what country invaded his wife, don’t we?! Eh, know what I mean there boys, know what I mean? Wink’s as good as a nudge, isn’t it?

    3. What’s even the argument here? That because everyone, everywhere around the world has the right to keep and bear arms, the US is no longer allowed to fight off an armed invasion?

      Does that really seem to follow?

      Or is it just that you’re worried a lot of people will come and peacefully adopt an American lifestyle?


        You know. The usual whine.

      2. Yes, I can see it now, a billion arabs, africans and latinos, all living in the USA, holding hands and singing kumbaya.

        1. A billion? So we’re going to almost completely depopulate Africa?

          1. Is that really the best you got?

            1. I see no reason to fear that allowing illegal immigrants, the vast majority of who’s primary motivation for coming here is to find a better job, to own guns is going to lead to a covert foreign invasion. The notion that an entire continent would empty to achieve that goal is simply absurd.

              1. If one has
                1. Open borders.
                2. The right of foreign nationals to bear arms.
                then this follows:
                3. A bunch of armed foreign nationals can cross the border.

                Lets see, open the borders to the world, and see how long it takes to fill the USA beyond it’s ability to feed everyone.

                1. “Lets see, open the borders to the world, and see how long it takes to fill the USA beyond it’s ability to feed everyone.”

                  This would never happen. I’m not in favor of open borders and think it’s a pipe dream with a host of unintended consequences but your fears of armed Mexicans reconquering Texas and America running out of food are so stupid I can hardly believe it.

                  By what mechanism do you think Mexican immigrants will make there not be enough food for people?

            2. “Is that really the best you got?”

              It’s not the best he’s got, but it’s the best your dumbass argument deserves.

              1. Looks like a bunch of posts disappeared. Was one of those fuckers Merkin?

        2. That’s a helpful answer.

      3. I firmly believe in the right to bear arms, it’s just too darn hot for long sleeves.

  24. NAP leads to slavery. I like this one.

    1. You mean it doesn’t? I’m outta here then. Back to Daily Stormer.

      1. You see, it doesn’t directly, but if a society based on the NAP were to enforce private property rights it would need slaves to build the …. Let me finish wolfing down this bag of paint chips and I’ll finish that thought.

        1. Well we better figure this out quick because we’re so close to having such a society now!

    2. If I catch someone trespassing on my land in an AnCap society, whose going to stop me from enslaving them? You?

      1. You’re like the idiots who think unless we paid taxes there would be no social services.

        Where do you come from? give me a hint. like a college, if you went to one.

        1. I see you haven’t answered my question. Or am I not allowed to defend my private property? What if I catch the trespasser, and give him the choice, shoot him or enslave him? Always assuming I have “Trespassers will be shot” signs up.

          No-one here has done anything other than mouth platitudes or throw ad-homs about.

          1. In an ideal AnCap society (which I don’t really buy into) the private defense agency that he pays would free him from you.

            1. the private defense agency that he pays would free him from you.

              Or his kith and kin.

              1. Or maybe your neighbors that don’t like the idea of a Slaver living in their midst.

                Neighbors whose children are all Bazooka experts. and ninjas.

              2. Oh? So, what would they do about my “Trespassers will be shot” policy? They can take that up with my private defense agency.
                If I pay enough, I get to enslave trespassers, provided that they are forwarned before trespassing. Hell, it’s kinder than shooting them outright.

                You have both just proved my point quite well.

                  1. Mad dogs get put down.

                    This is why I love you, HM.

                  2. By who, exactly?

                    1. OK. You got me there. Promise not to sick him on me, and I promise I wont enslave the children.

                1. You’re private defense agency may come to the conclusion that you can’t possibly pay them enough to make it profitable to go to war with another agency. In which case they would probably negotiate, possibly to hand you over to the people you wronged to face justice in a private court, rather than continue to allow you to take up their time.

                  1. You’re confusing him with someone who argues in good faith.

                    1. And many seem to think that once the libertarian utopia is established, all people will be of good faith.

                  2. Perhaps.
                    What if I was a multi-billionaire? And I owned the defense agency?
                    Or what if the slave didn’t have a contract with any security agency?
                    What if I imported him, and, as cheap labor = big bucks, I have a nice, powerful security agency to back my claim, along with other slavers.
                    My point is quite simple, an AnCap society that repects private property rights will wind up with cases of slavery.

                2. I’m sure your private defense agency has a clause that they’re not there to defend your random-slaving, as that’s basically an invitation to conflict.

                  The NAP actually has a starting point you keep skipping. You violate it, no one is obligated to respect it for you. So your 1-man slaving concept is pretty doomed at the outset.

                  back to your education = have you considered applying for special-needs considerations? Obama is very bullish about getting people like you acreditted… though frankly i think farmwork might be better for you… is that why you hate mexicans? competition?

                  1. The NAP says no man should initiate aggression.

                    I get trespassed upon = I’ve been aggressed against.

                    As I could make billions with slaves, so chances are, provided that I get slaves that are have no contract with a security agency, I could find a security agency that permits me to have slaves, provided it doesn’t conflict with another security agency.

                    1. How is slavery self-defense? Plus, you’ve not really dealt with (one of) the underlying principles of the NAP: People can’t be owned by other people*.

                      *voluntary indentured servitude notwithstanding

                    2. Ah, so I can go to some African slave market, get slaves to sign a contract, and viola! Slave.

                    3. Well, yes. That’s Walter Block’s view. Perhaps you should read his essay and his critique of Rothbard’s argument against it.


                      nevermind your desperately contrived hypothetical runs afoul of most common sense assumptions about the permissiveness of your peers

                      As HM said, you and your psychopathic presumptions would be buried in a shallow grave before you ever built your billionaire slave empire.

                      Are you really this dumb, or are you Tulpa, and masturbating violently from all the attention? really, you need to relax and consider going back to school.

                    5. Yeah, my MS in physics never prepared me for the idiocy I’ve seen here.

                    6. Apparently its proven insufficient for you to finish a coherent thought in English.

                      Ted Kazinski had advanced degrees, and for his faults, his manifesto makes more sense than you do. if you had any actual sense you’d be self-aware how stupid your hypothetical critique of “ancap-ism” is in the context of the actual subject matter here.

                      which then leads to how stupid your comments were re: the impending invading army of mexicans we are opening our doors to.

                      Honestly, claiming that you’ve gotten an education ‘somewhere’ on ‘something’ does nothing but diminish the credibility of whatever institution handed you that bit of paper.

                    7. ZardozSpeaksToYou|8.24.15 @ 10:40PM|#
                      “Yeah, my MS in physics never prepared me for the idiocy I’ve seen here.”

                      Given the idiocy you’ve shown here, you should sue the high-school that gave you a diploma.
                      You’re a fucking ignoramus, and bragging about some degree isn’t helping you.

                    8. Billionaire slave empires already exist.

                    9. “”Billionaire slave empires already exist””

                      tell me where, oh wise one.

            2. And if the captor’s private defense agency objects, what you have is what we in the real world call a war.

              AnCap is idiocy.

          2. So you never went to college? That’s sad. They have all sorts of aid and scholarships and stuff for disadvantaged/disabled types.

          3. throw ad-homs about

            It’s amazing, the almost 1-1 correspondence between being a self-pitying moron and having no idea what the ad hominem fallacy is.

            Zardoz: if you no understand, me just call you dumb. You dumb.

            1. It makes me sad because Zardoz is a fantastic movie.

      2. You?

        Anyone who believes he has a moral right to do so.

        You know. Just like what happens now.

        1. Great! Just more workers for my coal mine.

          1. Great! Just more workers for my coal mine.

            It amazes me how everyone who worships the state–and you do worship it, rather than just accepting it as a practical necessity–sees it as the only force stopping themselves from being the immoral fucks they truly are at heart. Really, at this point, you’re basically saying that you should be locked up and have the key thrown away. Surely you do not expect to be taken as a moral authority when you reveal your intentions so?

            Moreover, in the absence of the state, you can rest assured that you will not be the slaving warlord you seem to fancy yourself as. You might get away with some depravity here and there, but you will gravitate always to taking orders from someone who doesn’t so desire to be ruled. You will not have any coal mines, as you likely know nothing about coal or mining, but you could have some wards to abuse. Might makes right, after all, don’t you think?

            What you fail to realize, though, is that the state doesn’t just protect us from you. It also protects you from us. “God created man, and Sam Colt made him equal.”

      3. AnCap=Pacifist. That whut you be thinkin?

      4. “If I catch someone trespassing on my land in an AnCap society, whose going to stop me from enslaving them? You?”

        Most people here aren’t an caps.

        1. If you don’t want to increase the federal budget by 10% a year than that means you advocate for some dystopian warlord run wasteland.

  25. The conditioning continues. I’m sure the students fingerprints will never be used outside of this system.…..afeterias/

    1. Well yes after a fashion. It’s actually one of our conspiracies, it makes you easier to inventory. Cuz all you mammals look alike

  26. I get the feeling there is one person posting at least 3 different handles right now.

    1. Captain America has HYDRA, we have Tulpa

    2. I have multiple personalities but just one handle

  27. Since the belief that aliens have second amendment rights has no effect on the outcome, doesn’t that make the court’s opinions mere dicta, with no effect on future decisions?

    1. I don’t know. That’s a good question.

  28. Brief Fox News segment on anchor babies.


    1. That’s nice.
      Some numbers and then a heaping helping of innuendo suggesting it’s BAD!
      I posted some links regarding the largely-imaginary ‘Pacific Plastic Patch’ this morning, and one of them had a guy saying ‘well that stuff shouldn’t be there’ even if we can’t find any damage.
      ‘Everybody knows….!’

    2. So. Canada and the USA have it right on automatic birth right citizenship? Maybe I’m a bleeding heart but isn’t this a good thing?

      Europe has its own circumstances to consider so not sure if referencing them helps the argument much.

  29. We shouldn’t allow ill eagles to have guns! What if one sneezes and accidentally pulls the trigger? Or is so out of it’s mind on Sudafed that it just starts firing randomly from it’s aerie?

    1. That’s why Sudafed should be illegal.

    2. HAH! Like Eagles can get sudafed – they have to show an ID and the pharmacist keeps it behind the counter….so.

      Nice try, Doctor Evil, but not this time.

      *stands looking on approvingly at the PWNage*


    1. This is a weird one, innit? Jesus.

      1. Wait wut – Rufus is Jesus?

        1. Can’t be. He’s not American.

          1. Clearly I can not drink the wine in front of you.

  31. Two words for your illegal immigration trouble.


    As in just build one and place it over Mexico.

    1. Is there cake in the cake dome?

      1. I guess (scratches head) you can put whatever you want in it.

        Maybe this is a question best posed to Warty, Episiarch and Sugar Free…and Crusty Juggler for the kinks.

        1. No, no, I don’t think any of us really want to know about Crusty Juggler and cakes.

          1. Like you haven’t heard of cake farts.

            1. Is that what happens after a night of drinking cake vodka?

    2. Is there cake in the cake dome?

      1. I forgot how much squirrels loved cake

        1. You know something? They ALL want cake…

          1. Who doesn’t?

    3. CAKE DOME


  32. No Liquid Allowed in Carry On? No problem

    1. How much trouble can a 110lb drunk woman cause? I mean, outside an American college campus.

      1. It’s airport security so that’s like Threatcon Delta

        1. Threatcon Delta: lamest frat evar.

  33. This has been a….strange thread. I’m going back to bed. Fuck you all.

    Except Rufus. Please continue to flesh out this idea of a – “Cake” Dome….

    1. I just put it out there.

      It’s up to you to flesh more of it out.

      You Yanks make me laugh. Always wanting Canadians to solve your problems.

      1. Juno that has never happened.

        1. Yeah. Right.


            1. Yes.

              And Vimy Ridge!

              We showed those Germans who was boss.

              1. Now, the only Canadians I know personally fill my FB with “Die Harper, Scum!”. If they wanted to replace him with a less worse pol it would be one thing. And they look like idiots wearing orange.

                1. Hey man, Cytotoxic assures me that replacing Harper with a bunch of outright socialists would be great because of legal prostitution or something.

                  1. The NDP are the worst possible option under all and any circumstances because they’re socialists. Simple as that.

        2. Almanian seem’s to be comfortable delegating problem solving to Canada so he can get his beauty rest. He probably needs more sleep cause he sounds grumpy.

          1. JB is the only person who understands me!

      2. “You Yanks make me laugh. Always wanting Canadians to solve your problems.”
        Can you help us out with some way to make sure everybody gets wonderful health care for free instantly?
        I know you can!

        1. FINE. I’m not a legit problem solver.


            1. *Sigh*


              /takes file from CS.

          1. Rufus J. Firefly|8.24.15 @ 10:03PM|#
            “FINE. I’m not a legit problem solver.

            Well, nuts!

  34. I see the racists are out in full force tonight. Well done. The 2nd amendment gets strengthened, and somehow people who ostensibly would support that if it applied to white people get angry about it.

    1. Kinda gives you the impression that maybe guns and abortions and all that isn’t their primary concern.

      Maybe it’s about pinning all the national woes on those dirty furriners to the south.

      1. It’s very difficult not to conclude some of these people just hate Mexicans when they’re concocting fantasies about Mexicans using legal firearms to take back California and seriously believe illegal immigrants will somehow starve us all to death.

        These are paranoid delusions so extreme that fear of something must be driving it…and that something appears to be foreigners.

        1. This is starting to remind me of threads during the Ebola days.

          1. Where is Papaya tonight anyways?

            1. Dunno…he’s on my block list.

              1. Really? Papaya’s not that bad. I normally reserve the block list for active trolls.

                PB is on there. New American iterations get added, but he hasn’t been here in a while. I blocked Bo but I still respond to him because I’m a masochist.

                1. De gustibus non est disputandum

                  1. “De gustibus non est disputandum”

                    I thought we just got through explaining how dangerous people from Latin America are, and here you are using their language.

                    1. Eduardo: To win, we will need a very special dance. La Tango de la Muerte!

                      Lisabella: Only one man has ever been foolish enough to attempt that dance, and he is dead!

                      Eduardo: My twin brother, Freduardo. But where he died, I shall live – in his apartment.

                      [They dance La Tango de la Muerte and survive]

                      Eduardo: You are now carrying my child.

                      Lisabella: But how?

                      Eduardo: It is the mystery of the dance.

                2. I’ll take “not that bad.”

              2. HM, you’re blocking me? I am sad. I may disagree with people here, but I try to do so politely. I don’t troll or call names or question motives.

                1. The best thing about being blocked by HM, you still get to see his youtube links.

                  1. He doesn’t get to see when I agree with him, though.

        2. I didn’t know mexicans were having babies to stay here and buy guns so they could take back california. Well then, that makes me change my mind. I say we should stand at the border of Ca and hand out guns as they pass by, but, they have to promise to take back california.

    2. It’s scary when illegals have second amendment rights because what if the Chinese launch a secret invasion of California with tens of millions of Chinese sleeper agents who plan to take over the state after legally purchasing AR-15s?

      1. There are literally 8,000 birth tourist babies born every year Irish. Most of them from Chinese women. What do you think they’re plotting? They’re slowing building an army of anchor babies that are gonna conquer the country from within. This is exactly what happened to the Romans!

        1. That or they plan on increasing the amount of bars in the US that also sell fish heads and rice.

      2. The idea that people who wanted to take over the country are going to be stopped by barely enforceable laws created by feckless morons stretches belief, a bit. Stopping them at the border at least has plausible (if specious) efficacy. Telling people who want to wage war (in this hypothetical) against the United States that they have to go through all the trouble of calling up a black market weapons dealer, on the other hand, does not.

    3. I wouldn’t say full force. Just one idiot with multiple handles would be my bet.

    4. The 2nd amendment gets strengthened

      If we extend First Amendment protections to perjury and death threats, would you say we strengthened the 1st amendment? No. What this ruling does is caricature the Second Amendment, not strengthen it.

      1. But that’s not a good analogy. A good analogy would be extending the First Amendment to everyone regardless of citizenship. Which would strengthen it. Inalienable rights are inalienable.

        1. That’s dilution, not strengthening. The first amendment was always supposed to apply to people in general (at least the speech, religion, and press parts). The second amendment is a “right of the people” — i.e., “We the People” who establish and ordain the constitution, citizens, which does not include illegal aliens.

          1. You can’t “dilute” something that is not finite.

          2. Get lost, Tulpa.

    1. Finally, an excuse to drink for lunch.

  35. Seems like theres a lot more name calling and ridicule used to defend libertarian principles than there used to be.

    1. Do you recall that ST:TNG episode where the crew devolved back to earlier, primitive forms? Welcome to the Howler Monkey Forum.

    1. drone-delivery of porn, drugs and gun

      So….that’s a thing, now?

      1. Hmmmmm…..

        1. Note to JB: Don’t let the Feds know!

          1. How would they find out? It’s not like they troll…..oh wait

            1. Creepy, right?

    2. How do you get that drone up your … Oh. It flies? I’m gonna try, anyways.

  36. This thread has felt kinda weird..

    1. Kinda?? I imagine we’re all just in some Agile Cyborg rant.

    2. Let’s just blame whoever is not here

      1. Well, I *was* going to take full responsibility, but now ….

      2. I blame Trump

  37. well, at least i have something new to add to the Greasonable filter.

  38. I’m perfectly willing to acknowledge the right of anyone, citizen or not, illegal or legal, to keep and bear arms, as part of a natural human right of self-defense.

    The important thing is that if we know an illegal immigrant has a gun, we know he is an illegal immigrant, and he should be departed. What he chooses to do with his natural right to keep and bear arms in his own country is his own problem.

    1. he should be departed

      That seems a little extreme.

      1. Lol, Wow. I’m even more bloodthirsty than I realized. Deported, of course.

        1. I’m not so good at this Hitandrunpublican yokeltarian thing I’m frequently accused of. I only want to deport illegal aliens when they commit crimes or become a public charge. Pretty much the exact same things I want to deport legal immigrants for.

          1. …when they commit crimes…

            Like sneaking across the border?

      2. *Dearly* departed, then?

      1. Nothing brightens my day like seeing Leo di Caprio get popped in the head.

        1. The part that stung, though? No Oscar.

  39. So in news other than whatever the fuck is going on above, I just finished my second read-through of The Name of the Wind and A Wise Man’s Fear by Patrick Rothfuss. The third book is rather belatedly forthcoming sometime not this year.

    This is shaping up to be an incredible series. It’s rich, incredibly detail-oriented fantasy that reads low on a first breeze-through but has such depth and scope when you start digging through the grit that it’s impossible really to explain all of its working parts. It’s a fully articulated fantasy world buried in the seeming fluff of asides and departures from the very entertaining plot. And part of the charm is that it’s a story told by an admitted fabulist and serial liar who’s obsessed with his own reputation, and terribly amused by how he shapes and perverts it for others. The ongoing story he wields is charming in its own right and well worth the read, but the goings-on behind it speak to ripples and glimmers of what Rothfuss has planned for the finale. After a second go-around I’m very impressed with his careful machinations.

    1. So *spoilers* to anyone who hasn’t read this but:

      Why do you think Kvothe no longer seems to have his powers in the current timeline? My working theory is that he learned his own true name and somehow caused himself to become a normal human being. Why he would do that I don’t know, but they’ve made it clear how powerful that sort of magic is, and I don’t know why else he wouldn’t be capable of using magic anymore.

      Also, the absolute most interesting part of the book is that fairy creature who is trapped in the tree that he meets who gives him advice. The concept is so interesting – it can see every possible future and therefore can essentially manipulate you into doing whatever it wants because it knows exactly what it has to say to set you towards a particular future. As a result, after you’ve met it every moment of your life has basically been planned out for you in advance with no possibility of deviating from your course. It’s like a malevolent creature that can strip everyone it meets of free will, which is a pretty terrifying, Lovecraftian concept.

      1. Also, Rothfuss apparently wants to write in the same universe with different characters after this series, which could be really interesting since it would further flesh out the world.

        1. Auri’s novella was pretty charming. I wouldn’t mind more of that. I still need to find Bast’s short story.

      2. I want to think he locked away his name and the essence of everything he was in his “thrice-locked chest.” Somebody on reddit mentioned that he may have subtracted himself from visibility to the Ctheah like one of Herbert’s no-ships by changing his name, rendering himself powerless but temporally invisible. And I want to think he’s laid a trap for the Amyr or the Chandrian, whoever ends up being the ultimate baddy (I’m not convinced it’s the Chandrian).

        But then I read the last few lines of AWMF and there’s a discrete reference to what sounds like Kvothe performing the first step of the Ketan, and now I’m not certain. Either Bast and Chronicler finally prevailed on him to resume his former life, or he’s been doing it all along, but it does sound like he really is merely a shade of his former self going through the motions.

        1. *more spoilers*

          I also have a lurking suspicion that he’s made up the large part of what fills the first two books, and finally having to contend with the powers provoked by unleashing the stories he told is his comeuppance in the third?both in his fantasy world and the framing story. And that’s what will bridge the gap between the two, Kvothe deliberately coming to terms with his many lies and the misfortunes he’s wrought, and how he proceeds in the framing story.

    2. The Name of the Wind

      That’s been near the top of my rotation for a while. Looking forward to it.

      1. Whatever you get out of it, you’ll be entertained. It’s tough to defend fantasy schlock, and the book trips over so many of the cliches, but it’s done deftly and purposefully that you’ll hardly notice. And it’s all put to good use.

        1. (Un)fortunately I have several Peter F. Hamilton 1,000 page door-stoppers to plow through first. One of the pitfalls of series (which I love) is that I find that I have to re-read the whole thing every time a new volume comes out.

        2. I hate a lot of that kind of fantasy because it’s so overdone. I like fantasy stories that have different settings than you normally see or work themselves out in ways different from the cliches, but usually these high fantasy books don’t do it for me. I still love those two though because they’re very well written and they’re also frequently very funny. One thing that often kills the fantasy genre is how seriously the writers take it.

          I also like horror fantasy like Lovecraft or T.E.D. Klein, and some of the stuff in Rothfuss’ books shade over into sort of Lovecraftian realms, what with demons that wear peoples’ skin and such.

          I don’t know if you’ve read him, but I like Thomas Ligotti a lot. He’s probably best known for being a major inspiration behind the first and not-shitty season of True Detective. Ligotti is a seriously emotionally unhealthy man living in Detroit who writes Lovecraftian horror stories that are often set in decaying urban environments or squalid inner cities…which is kind of on-the-nose given where he lives. Here’s one of his stories that is online and is about a mysterious factory that sucks the life out of the land around it and produces strange devices that no one knows the purpose of.

          1. “Had the machinery in the Red Tower not been evaporated, I believe that the subterranean graveyard, or something very much like it, would nonetheless have come into existence at some point or another. This was the direction in which the factory had been moving, a fact suggested by some of its later models of novelty items. Machines were becoming obsolete as the diseased mania of the Red Tower intensified and evolved into more experimental, even visionary projects. I have previously reported that the headstones in the factory’s subterranean graveyard were absent of any names of the interred and were without dates of birth and death. This truth has been confirmed by numerous accounts rendered in borderline gibberish. The reason for these blank headstones is entirely evident as one gazes upon them standing crooked and closely packed together in the phosphorescent haze given off by the stone walls covered with luminous paint. None of these graves, in point of fact, could be said to have anyone buried in them whose names and dates of birth and death would require inscription on the headstones. These were not what might be called burying graves. This is to say that these were in no sense graves for burying the dead, quite the contrary: these were graves of a highly experimental design from which the newest productions of the Red Tower were to be born.”

          2. Bookmarked. Have a beer pairing to go with that?

            1. +1 discomfiture. Nice.

            2. Just to give you an idea of how fucked in the head Ligotti is, here’s a quote from his non-fiction book where he argues the human species should stop reproducing.

              “For the rest of the earth’s organisms, existence is relatively uncomplicated. Their lives are about three things: survival, reproduction, death?and nothing else. But we know too much to content ourselves with surviving, reproducing, dying?and nothing else. We know we are alive and know we will die. We also know we will suffer during our lives before suffering?slowly or quickly?as we draw near to death. This is the knowledge we “enjoy” as the most intelligent organisms to gush from the womb of nature. And being so, we feel shortchanged if there is nothing else for us than to survive, reproduce, and die. We want there to be more to it than that, or to think there is. This is the tragedy: Consciousness has forced us into the paradoxical position of striving to be unself-conscious of what we are?hunks of spoiling flesh on disintegrating bones.”

              He’s a cheery fellow. They literally took his book Conspiracy Against the Human Race and used it as a template for Rust Cohle in True Detective, so Rust Cohle’s extreme nihilism is based on what Ligotti actually believes.

          3. I like fantasy stories that have different settings than you normally see or work themselves out in ways different from the cliches

            I totally agree, which is why I adored Piers Anthony’s “Apprentice Adept” series when I was a kid even though he is kind of a hack.

          4. One thing that often kills the fantasy genre is how seriously the writers take it.

            OTOH I do love some of the Shannara books…

  40. That man was Mariano Meza-Rodriguez, brought to the U.S. when he was a child by his parents but never a legitimate citizen here.

    He was charged with violating federal statute 18 U.S.C. ? 922(g)(5), which makes it illegal for an alien to “possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition.”

    Meza-Rodriguez claims the prosecution violated his Second Amendment rights. Two lower courts denied that illegal aliens had any Second Amendment rights.

    Okay, so what this is saying is that you don’t have to be a citizen to have recognizable Second Amendment rights.

    In this guy’s case, he had never broken the law before in such a way that would have disqualified him for owning a gun. The law unconstitutionally singled him out because he just so happened to not have the proper paperwork, which in of itself is not a valid reason to deny someone their Constitutional rights (such as a right to a fair trial, freedom of religion ,etc).

    Sounds like solid reasoning to me, but I am looking forward to the bitchy whines of the Trumpaloes.

  41. That man was Mariano Meza-Rodriguez, brought to the U.S. when he was a child by his parents but never a legitimate citizen here.

    He was charged with violating federal statute 18 U.S.C. ? 922(g)(5), which makes it illegal for an alien to “possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition.”

    Meza-Rodriguez claims the prosecution violated his Second Amendment rights. Two lower courts denied that illegal aliens had any Second Amendment rights.

    Okay, so what this is saying is that you don’t have to be a citizen to have recognizable Second Amendment rights.

    In this guy’s case, he had never broken the law before in such a way that would have disqualified him for owning a gun. The law unconstitutionally singled him out because he just so happened to not have the proper paperwork, which in of itself is not a valid reason to deny someone their Constitutional rights (such as a right to a fair trial, freedom of religion ,etc).

    Sounds like solid reasoning to me, but I am looking forward to the bitchy whines of the Trumpaloes.

  42. We got some trolls tonight, but none seemed to identify as Trumpets (if you’ll excuse me; I do like “Trumpaloes”).
    I’m sure a quick search will give you a ton of them whining about jobs and the purity of white, American wymenz.

  43. “… conviction would bar him from return.”

    I kinda laughed about that one. Suuuuuure it will.

  44. If the amendments to the constitution apply to anyone that is illegally in this country then by logic the constitution applies to anyone illegally in this country. If the constitution applies to illegals, then why are they restricted from voting, running for office, or even el presidente once they turn 35?

  45. Man, ruling that “the people” includes illegals is a lot stronger than Heller.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.