Rucker61, government has the rights We the People allow our Congress and leges to give it. Hint: We the People do not really care what the Rucker61s and like them care.
It's difficult to take your positions on Constitutional issues seriously when you fail to demonstrate even the most basic understanding of the Constitution.
Perhaps, Skipper, but the smart money takes a look at the current makeup of the Court, those likely to retire in the next 3 years and the party that will be in charge of nominations for replacements.
If you have certain weapons that need to be turned in sometime in the future, you won't do anything but turn them in, 6Gunner. You are not the type of incendiary revolutionary. You are just hot air.
Like all those gun owners in Connecticut and New York? Like those Australians who have held on to their prohibited guns for over 20 years now?
"Weapons of war" are bearable arms. The Court has already said the 2nd protects all bearable arms. You're in for a stunning disappointment.
Show this to be true. Be sure to not rely on a post hoc fallacy. You don't live here; your opinion on our culture only exposes your ignorance.
Sure now, people will just comply. Those that flock to buy guns, ammo and mags when any sort of ban threat is hinted are expending funds just so they can forfeit them voluntarily with little or no compensation, just to show they are good citizens, eh? 6Gunner will have a lot of company... his only problem will be finding space and a place to stash his considering all the others joining him.
And? An Taibhse: Sure now, people will just comply. Those that flock to buy guns, ammo and mags when any sort of ban threat is hinted are expending funds just so they can forfeit them voluntarily with little or no compensation, just to show they are good citizens, eh? 6Gunner will have a lot of company... his only problem will be finding space and a place to stash his considering all the others joining him. Americans don't need machine guns. There are not that many, etc. Americans as a whole want sensible regulation.
The make believe incendiary revolutionaries of the far right are all hot air and nothing more. Or they are poorly organized, equipped, and led as were the Republic of Texas fools twenty years ago who were hunted down like dogs.
Who has said anyone did? The 2nd Amendment RKBA is not a right to commit murder any more that the 1st Amendment right to freedom of religion is a right to engage in human sacrifice. How do you interpret the 2nd Amendment? What do you believe is the "right of the people" in the Amendment?
JakeStarkey said: ↑ The make believe incendiary revolutionaries of the far right are all hot air and nothing more. Or they are poorly organized, equipped, and led as were the Republic of Texas fools twenty years ago who were hunted down like dogs. The truth may be insulting, but it is still the truth. They were hunted down like dogs.
Oh btw for the "its just form nonsense from Bloomberg. The bill makes it illegal to allow a visiting friend to hold and examine your new gun, while at your house and in your continuous presence. More precisely, the bill requires that you and your friend first take the gun to a gun store. The dealer will take the gun into his custody and fill out all the same paperwork he would if he were selling you a gun out of his own inventory. You will pay whatever fee the dealer charges. Then your friend can receive the gun from the dealer. You can drive home, and your friend can look at the gun for a while, or even shoot it at some cans on your property. After he’s done, and ready to hand the gun back to you, the two of you must return to the gun store. The store will process the return of your gun exactly the same way as it did the original “transfer.” All the same paperwork again, and another fee. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/388080/new-anti-gun-strategies-dave-kopel
Most Americans are proud and staunchly protective of the document that protects their individual rights and whether they avail themselves of their gun rights or not, would see any reduction of those rights as a reduction or threat to their other individual rights. One of my litmus tests for a candidate is their position on the 2A. If a candidate supports restrictions or calls for repeal, then, in my mind, they are capable of removing any prohibition on government to encroach on the rights of the people as they see expedient. Any repeal of the 2A, would be likely followed by abandoning the the 4th, 10th, and potentially the 1st.