Culture San Francisco Declares NRA a "Domestic Terrorist Organization" -

Niggernerd

Spooky Fumika ready to cast a spell on you
kiwifarms.net
As a citizen of oopistan ans by the power of our Errverlord I declare niggers a terrorist organization
 

mindlessobserver

kiwifarms.net
Since nobody has pointed this out yet, I am going too. What the San Francisco city council just did here is unconstitutional. Terrorism falls under the purview of national defense which a federal matter. As such the Federal Government maintains a list of active terrorist organizations, used largely as a reference for the DoD and Homeland Security.

The NRA is not on this list.

More importantly however the San Francisco City Council does not have the legal or constitutional authority to make such a designation. The constitution does not grant to the individual states the authority of "common defense". This is power strictly reserved to the Federal Government and ONLY the Federal Government can make a deterimination as to whether or not an organization, made up of US citizens mind you, constitutes a threat to the defense of the nation. The City Council does not even have State authority as it does not represent the State of California. So it loses even THAT defense, as weak as it might be.

Which means this decision by the city council was undertaken as speech by the incorporated agency known as the City of San Francisco. Calling any organization, especially one legally incorporated in the USA, a "Terrorist organization" is Defamation Per Se. Worse for San Francisco, they are not a private company, nor are they are private person. Thanks to the lawsuits by leftists to ban licence plates with confederate flags on them, the Supreme Court in Walker v. Texas Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, held that Governments within the USA (in this case the State of Texas) did NOT have first amendment protections under the US Constitution.

I hope San Francisco's taxpayers are ready to pay the NRA a shit ton of money. They just committed defamation per se, and according to the US supreme court they are not protected by the first amendment. They also cannot claim a compelling public interest as "terrorism" exceeds their authority. National defense is not invested in the city council of San Francisco, but in the US Federal Government.
 

Marissa Moira

kiwifarms.net
Since nobody has pointed this out yet, I am going too. What the San Francisco city council just did here is unconstitutional. Terrorism falls under the purview of national defense which a federal matter. As such the Federal Government maintains a list of active terrorist organizations, used largely as a reference for the DoD and Homeland Security.

The NRA is not on this list.

More importantly however the San Francisco City Council does not have the legal or constitutional authority to make such a designation. The constitution does not grant to the individual states the authority of "common defense". This is power strictly reserved to the Federal Government and ONLY the Federal Government can make a deterimination as to whether or not an organization, made up of US citizens mind you, constitutes a threat to the defense of the nation. The City Council does not even have State authority as it does not represent the State of California. So it loses even THAT defense, as weak as it might be.

Which means this decision by the city council was undertaken as speech by the incorporated agency known as the City of San Francisco. Calling any organization, especially one legally incorporated in the USA, a "Terrorist organization" is Defamation Per Se. Worse for San Francisco, they are not a private company, nor are they are private person. Thanks to the lawsuits by leftists to ban licence plates with confederate flags on them, the Supreme Court in Walker v. Texas Division of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, held that Governments within the USA (in this case the State of Texas) did NOT have first amendment protections under the US Constitution.

I hope San Francisco's taxpayers are ready to pay the NRA a shit ton of money. They just committed defamation per se, and according to the US supreme court they are not protected by the first amendment. They also cannot claim a compelling public interest as "terrorism" exceeds their authority. National defense is not invested in the city council of San Francisco, but in the US Federal Government.
All good points, all good points.

But you forget that the average SFCC member has a sub 70 IQ.
 

Club Sandwich

kiwifarms.net
Somebody in San Fran owns stock in gun companies and needed to drive up the price of guns.
there's only a handful of publicly traded munitions / accessories companies. virtually the entire "gun industry" in the US is privately held.

also as someone that lives in the Bay Area and involved in the gun industry, pretty much nobody professionally, competitively, or even privately, who is involved in the industry cares anything about this as a matter of course. we're constantly worried about more and more laws being put on the books to turn normal people into felons and deprived them of their freedom and property by abusing their authority via the supermajority of votes in our legislature.

SF being even more of a failure and virtue signalling to people that don't, and will never own or use firearms is irrelevant. it's a very sharp divide in CA that surpasses political ideologies. at the gun range, we're all on the same side pretty much. the handful of fudd sell-outs are a non-issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: beautiful person

mindlessobserver

kiwifarms.net
All good points, all good points.

But you forget that the average SFCC member has a sub 70 IQ.
They have to be. I am absolutely aghast. I know its a virtue signal, but there are so many ways to virtue signal without crossing the line. They could have passed a non-binding resolution condemning the NRA's stances on gun laws. Maybe passed a law to remove the NRA's tax exemption within the city. Meaningless since the NRA has no presence in San Francisco, but still. It would have been a virtue signal with no force of authority. I cannot believe the cities lawyers did not try and stop this. If they didn't they all, ALL of them need to be disbarred. When this lands in federal court (and it will) the damages sought will be in the hundreds of millions, if not billions. San Francisco does not have 1st amendment rights after all, the NRA needs money, and the Federal Courts have always and without fail taken a very, VERY dim view of defamation cases where the defendant is either a politician or in this case, the actual government.

Christ these people are dumb.
 

Maxliam

Professional Niggo
kiwifarms.net
When I saw the news the first thing I thought of was simply this about San Fran:


My next thought was whether I wanted to build an M4 or buy something else that will piss off liberals.
 
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino