696
Comments (23)
sorted by:
19
Choppermagic 19 points ago +19 / -0

Wait until CNN realizes she also votes as a woman too, but can hear cases about women's right to vote!

16
FuccBoiii 16 points ago +16 / -0

Same retards who can't be bothered to do a 5 second google search on 4chan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ivCo9UN_9jo

12
Politik90 12 points ago +12 / -0

So by this big brained logic, if she did not own a gun she would also not be able to to rule on gun rights cases.

Checkmate Bloompf

3
Chuj 3 points ago +3 / -0

Came here to say that. Have gun, do not have gun, both seem to invalidate ones ability to adjudicate the issue per Dems logic

3
CalVotesMatter 3 points ago +3 / -0

It makes sense, since no one should be able to infringe on the 2nd.

3
bigdickhangsright 3 points ago +3 / -0

That's why I only own bullets, so I can be a gun rights arbiter.

1
Anime_titty_expert 1 point ago +1 / -0

Idk, I think you probably hold a bias unless you have a magazine too

8
Trumpvtr 8 points ago +8 / -0

Libtard..!

4
Thingthing22 4 points ago +4 / -0

Robots.

4
Only_Rosie_ODonnell 4 points ago +4 / -0

Heller already set the precedent

3
Ladybug87 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thank God. 5-4 decision - we were so close to lose our 2nd Amendment. Today Ted Cruz walked us through a history of 5-4 decisions.

2
Only_Rosie_ODonnell 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes, I'm hoping the SCOTUS goes even further on 2AND. Time to build on that and strike down restrictions in the various states, and the NFA is ever possible. I'm about to listen to Ted's bit, I missed it

2
Ladybug87 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's a succinct description of what he talks about in his new book - A Vote Away. It is scary to think how many times we dodged bullets just because we had a slight majority in the SC.

2
Only_Rosie_ODonnell 2 points ago +2 / -0

Pretty incredible how close we were to losing 1A and 2A. What's even more frightening is that the obama DOJ (and hilary and biden pledge to do the same) was so willing to argue for the abolishment of our fundamental rights.

I'm even more thankful for Trump now. I have a renewed admiration for Lion Ted

4
MustafaJones 4 points ago +4 / -0

As opposed to all those on the left who don’t own a gun or know a single thing about guns making laws on guns? So I guess a person who thinks a barrel shroud is a should thing that goes up is most qualified to rule on gun right?

1
Mr_Clit_Beastwood 1 point ago +1 / -0

Diane Finestein BTFO. God, I wish that apple-headed freak would retire.

3
supersecretaccount82 3 points ago +3 / -0

The idiots working at CNN, WaPo, NYT, etc. don't personally know anyone who owns a gun so they think all of us are the worst "muh rahts!!!" bubba stereotypes.

3
VoterIDMatters 3 points ago +3 / -0

The only thing that would make her not able to rule on gun rights is if she did NOT own a gun

3
Rune_ 3 points ago +3 / -0

So, they’re saying the only people who could correctly judge on gun rights are people who have never touched a gun? How is that better? Retards.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
3
Phil_Selway 3 points ago +3 / -0

So judges can't send people to jail because they have freedom?

2
eupraxia128 2 points ago +2 / -0

Call your cable company, and tell them to stop forcing you to pay for CNN.

1
wehavetogoback 1 point ago +1 / -0

orange man's appointed judge says he's human, but could still fairly judge human rights.