Gun regulations always mean- who gets to use what guns. Guns arent technically 'banned' in England either, but still virtually no one is allowed to have them, even less are allowed to carry them, and even less are allowed to carry one that is useful against violent crimunals. Thats effectively a ban. Is there a regulation you want to pass that doesnt prevent someone from legally being armed with a certain firearm? Because that 'regulation' bans them from being armed. Calling gun regulations 'gun ban' is just getting away from the deceptive jargon.
The new Orwellian double speak from the gun banners is calling all sorts of garbage designed to only harass honest citizens "gun SAFETY" regulations. No-a magazine ban doesn't make guns safer. Semi auto bans don't make guns safer. Requiring background checks to buy a box of ammo doesn't make guns safer. It's yet another dishonest manipulation akin to calling semi autos ASSAULT weapons
The argument is, is it a right or is it a privilege? Persons who can read the english language understand the explicit language of the 2a states that it is a right, which means bans by type are not within the power of the government. Persons who cannot read the english language, or whom suffer from various and sundry other maladies of the mind or spirit, do not understand that the explicit language of the 2a states that it is a right and instead consider it a privilege which is within the power of government to grant, withhold, limit, etc. There can be no agreement there. Its a binary solution set, either a right and therefore not regulable in that particular manner or a privilege and therefore fair game. You're plaintively asking why we can't all just agree its a privilege and trust you to only limit it in ways YOU think are reasonable. You're basically demanding everyone simply knuckle under and agree with you or they're a *****. Its a transparent attempt at emotional manipulation.
That's like asking a black person during Segregation who complains it violates the Constitution whether or not they've tried to sit at the front of the bus or eat at a whites only counter. Constitutional violations are what we are pointing out. Per se they occur if we're pointing them out. That doesn't make them acceptable somehow.
God given right to be able to possess a weapon in public != God given right to actually obtain a given example or weapon despite your modest resources. I have a right to speak, I don't have a right to be provided with my ****ing lines.
that ban was imposed by DEMOCRATS who were upset that the GOP had enough votes for the McClure-VOlker Firearms Owners Protection Act of 1986 to pass. The Dems-meeting late at night and using confusing language-added a poison pill to the bill. The sponsor, the odious and late Bill Hughes justified it with the following evidence:"who can be in favor of machine guns". there was no evidence whatsoever of legal machine guns being used in crime. And your past posts strongly indicate you favor this ban. Most of us who are actually advocates for the second amendment do not
That's one reason why you suffer high gun incidents, especially when 6 year Tommy blows his little sister's brain out. Do you know why an American brain hears Gun Ban when the words Gun Regulation is mentioned? You have car regulations, food regulations, building regulations, but they're not banned. So why are Americans confused with guns?
All guns are legal, that's fantastic. Back to the thread. Do you know why an American brain hears Gun Ban when the words Gun Regulation is mentioned? You have car regulations, food regulations, building regulations, but they're not banned. So why are Americans confused with guns?
well regulation can mean many things and when it comes from left-wingers it usually means a step towards a ban.
why don't you tell me what regulations you would impose if we made you field marshal doctor-exalted dear leader for life
Gun banner-we have to ban AR 15 rifles Skeptical patriot-why Gun banner-because those are used in mass shootings Skeptical patriot-handguns are used in 3/4 of mass shootings and over 85% of gun shot murders-why don't you want to ban handguns if stopping murders or mass murders is your goal
Dis-information. I will repeat myself. Shotguns and rifles/long barrel revolvers are different. So with shotguns, the police have to have a valid reason why you can't have a shotgun. So you apply, and they look at your police record, it's clear. They look at your medical history, it's clear. They look to see and dangerous incidents happened on your driving licence, it's clear. You referee, your local vicar, vouched for you. You then own as many shotguns you want. You then keep them out of the public, and keep them secure when not in use. As for rifles and long barred revolvers, you need a reason. So you're part of a gun club, or you're a warden on an estate etc.. then go buy that firearm. But what this means is, it's up to you how you conduct yourself, if you are clean and good to go, knock your pan in. So those that present a dodgy past, doesn't get a licence and doesn't own a shotgun/firearm, certainly not legally. But gun shops won't sell without the correct paperwork. So what does this do? It allows people to use and enjoy firearms, and it hopefully reduces the bad eggs from obtaining one. This creates lower gun stats. If you don't believe me, just Google gun deaths etc.. by country