Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Two-thirds of the Congress must propose amendments, . . .

To be more precise:
that is 2/3 of EACH HOUSE of Congress.

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Hard to see how it would be covered under an individual right.

Only if it is necessary for it to be hard to see.

How exactly would a tank be used in self defense?

How would it be a weapon that would be used by an individual militiaman?

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

You're not in court right now bright boy . . .

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

How would it be a weapon that would be used by an individual militiaman?

Are you guys militiamen?

1 Reply

Sounds about right!

http://imageshack.us/a/img707/8545/conpic.jpg

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You're not in court right now bright boy . . .

1. I need not be in court to correct the errors
of fellows with very delicate egos.

2. I choose not to comment upon the acuity of your intellect.

1 Reply

Go away you dorky creep! You post horseshit about religion that has not got a damn thing to do with guns. And continue to hate on people the same way you boast about how they hate on you! Want to make a difference? Be different!

2 Replies

@IRIGHTTHEWRONGS,

Kiss my ass you troll!

0 Replies

@oralloy,

So if a gun requires a Federal license to own, that is OK?

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
How would it be a weapon that would be used by an individual militiaman?

Are you guys militiamen?

No, but that is one aspect of the Second Amendment. If you want to assert an individual right to have a tank, it would be an oversight to not address the militia aspects of the the Second Amendment.

If you want to assert that this "individual right to have a tank" is specifically related to self defense, then perhaps we could dispense with dealing with the militia. However, I still don't see how a tank would be of any use as a self-defense weapon.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

So if a gun requires a Federal license to own, that is OK?

Define OK.

I would oppose any move for such a requirement.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
At least one of those guns is already illegal under Federal law.

Nonsense.

So, you are just fine with the Federal government requiring a license and charging a $200 fee to own a weapon or a cosmetic feature?

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

So if a gun requires a Federal license to own, that is OK?

No; that violates the Bill of Rights.

David

0 Replies

http://m.static.newsvine.com/servista/imagesizer?file=http3A2F2Fwww.newsvine.com2F_vine2Fimages2Fusers2Frobtornoe2F5884539.jpg&width=600

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
parados wrote:
At least one of those guns is already illegal under Federal law.

Nonsense.

So, you are just fine with the Federal government requiring a license and charging a $200 fee to own a weapon or a cosmetic feature?

No.

And any such regulation of cosmetic features would be a violation of Rational Basis Review, as there is no legitimate reason for such regulation.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
So if a gun requires a Federal license to own, that is OK?

Define OK.

I would oppose any move for such a requirement.

But you think those guns would be legal if you had to pay $200 and register the device with the Federal government. You would also think it was legal if you could only own it in 15 states?

1 Reply

President Obama's plan to address gun violence meets resistance on Capitol Hill as lawmakers say
proposals, like an assault weapons ban, would not prevent shootings like the one in Newtown, Conn.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
parados wrote:
So if a gun requires a Federal license to own, that is OK?

Define OK.

I would oppose any move for such a requirement.

But you think those guns would be legal if you had to pay $200 and register the device with the Federal government. You would also think it was legal if you could only own it in 15 states?

As far as federal law goes, yes. They would of course not be legal in any state that outlawed them.

1 Reply

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/74927_415019278578748_585219776_n.jpg

0 Replies

@IRIGHTTHEWRONGS,

IRIGHTTHEWRONGS wrote:

Go away you dorky creep! You post horseshit about religion that has not got a damn thing to do with guns. And continue to hate on people the same way you boast about how they hate on you! Want to make a difference? Be different!

And while you’re down there kissing my ass please take the time and help unpry your other personality from my buttocks, It’s been a burden dragging him behind me with with his bible thumping christian lips glued to my ass the last several weeks.

1 Reply

Another major school shooting today ... Newtown, Conn

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know