The AR15 IS a weapon of war and IS designed to kill people!!!!!

There's no right to repeal or amend the constitution.
There's a process.
That process takes 2/3 of Congress and 38 state legislatures to agree.
As such, that process will never be fully applied to the 2nd Amendment.
.

 

proof

 

that's why the gun banners want justices who ignore the purpose, meaning and intent of the second amendment and pretend it doesn't say what it does

 

I want to ban all guns and rifles, but why is that "harassing lawful gun owners" or being "leftwing" or "not doing anything that harms criminals"? You are saying that I am one of those "y'all" people. Those are your words. So what's that all about?

 

..... a ..... n ..... d ..... that's called "a right".

That's extremely short-sighted.

 

That's a lot of quoting from me but where is the part that you call "proof" of me "harassing lawful gun owners" or being "leftwing" or "not doing anything that harms criminals"?

 

so you want a society where only the government and criminals have firearms. Sounds like "Schindler's List" or "The Killing Fields"

 

You just admitted you wanted to ban all privately owned firearms. That, by definition is harassing lawful gun owners

 

I don't understand how so many absurd conclusions can be made so consistently.

 

What did you mean by "I want to ban all guns and rifles"?

 

apparently they don't even understand the obvious consequences of what they want

 

gun = a weapon incorporating a metal tube from which bullets, shells, or other missiles are propelled by explosive force, typically making a characteristic loud, sharp noise.

ban = officially or legally prohibit.

all = used to refer to the whole quantity or extent of a particular group or thing..

 

How would this not harass lawful gun owners?

How would this not help criminals?

 

If guns are banned they wouldn't be "lawful gun owners". Is that not obvious?

What did you mean by "not help criminals"?

 

If guns are banned they'd immediately be unbanned, as banning is unconstitutional. All of your efforts prior to such a ban count as harassment.

Wouldn't armed criminals consider an environment with just unarmed victims to be an advantage?

 

Are you saying that the Constitution doesn't abide by the rules, regulations, and stipulations of the Constitution itself?

That makes no sense.

Why?

 

"Banning" is a legislative action; the Constitutionality of such a ban is determined by the Judiciary.

You're trying to remove the rights of law abiding citizens. I'd considerthat harassmentand more.

Because your ban won't take a single gun away from criminals who will use them on an unarmed populace.

 

Besides China, North Korea and Venezuela who has banned all guns?

 

That's a fair correctionality and it's the informationality of it that I'm trying to tell you.

It's not a "right" if it's illegal and if it's illegal then gun-owners are not "law-abiding". . Is that still not obvious?

If you don't understand the falsiality of what you just said then I'm not going to waste a single second explaining it to you.

 

You're not here for the hunting, are you?

 

What did you mean by "the hunting?

 

let me explain the obvious

criminals already ignore gun bans because in the USA, anyone with a felony cannot legally possess any modern (cartridge) firearm

if your wet dream of banning all guns happened-you have only impacted those who once could legally own guns. Criminals would still own them as they do now

your scheme would result in a society where law abiding people are disarmed while criminals remained armed

QED-you want criminals to have a safe working environment

 

Oh, my. How an armed citizen can be considered "law-abiding" in a country where guns are illegal is one of those fantasies reserved for the ****-*****.

UYA-yeah, sure.

 

your argument is really interesting. If guns are banned-the only people you are hurting are those who were able to own guns prior to the ban. I don't know if you are being obtuse on purpose or if you actually don't understand your own point

 

Your plan would leave law abiding citizens unarmed and criminals armed. Why is this desirable?