It's Coming

#251
#251
0nelilreb said:
That’s the part that’s wrong . Should those same people have their other rights revoked also ?
Click to expand...
If they committed voter fraud, lose right to vote, etc. Reducing the risk to public takes on several forms. If you pose a specific threat, you jeopardize losing your civilian benefits of being a US citizen.
 
#252
#252
Enki_Amenra said:
My bubble must not be as small as yours. How do you not understand the legality aspect of your own point? It is not a hypothetical argument based on who does or doesn't know what the felon has done, it is a fact that owning is illegal. They choose not to own because it is illegal for them and they want to avoid more jail time.

You guys make terrible arguments.
Click to expand...

You gave “ the killer moved in next door “ to me argument LOL .
 
#254
#254
Enki_Amenra said:
My bubble must not be as small as yours. How do you not understand the legality aspect of your own point? It is not a hypothetical argument based on who does or doesn't know what the felon has done, it is a fact that owning is illegal. They choose not to own because it is illegal for them and they want to avoid more jail time.

You guys make terrible arguments.
Click to expand...
You are literally using the existing law in effect to justify why it should be the law while we are pointing out the existing law is unjust and providing examples why. And we are the ones making terrible arguments 😂
 
#256
#256
NorthDallas40 said:
You are literally using the existing law in effect to justify why it should be the law while we are pointing out the existing law is unjust and providing examples why. And we are the ones making terrible arguments 😂
Click to expand...
How stupid are some of you people over here?
 
#257
#257
Enki_Amenra said:
The "killer" would move in next door to someone. Dont be a dummy. Other law abiding citizen have the right to a safe environment, not just you.
Click to expand...

You have no clue who moves in next door to you nor should you as long as they aren’t causing anyone any problems . Are you always this afraid of people ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#260
#260
Enki_Amenra said:
I value life over lifetime rights dummy. If you pose a risk to society, the risk needs to be taken away.
Click to expand...

What life dummy ? The possibility that somebody some where kosher harm someone unless we revoke their rights for something somebody did 25 years ago ? What gated community did you say you are holed up in again ?
 
#263
#263
RobertPellitt said:
Do you know what a militia is? Do you know how different a militia is now from what the Framers considered? Then if there no limits why can’t you own any type of firearm? How does the government limit citizens from owning any type of weapon? It’s because the Second Amendment is not an absolute right for individuals!
Click to expand...

You are conflating arguments. Heller held:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

Why that clear conclusion is somehow obfuscated in your head by there being different categories of weapons is a mystery.

And FYI the whole "assault weapons" thing is a ginned up bit of phrasing to foment an anti-bias. An AR for example is functionally no more than a magazine fed semi-auto. In this it is no different than other magazine fed SA's available to the American public dating back to at least 1905.

If you wish engage the board about the individual right to firearms (lost cause, settled law) or to what extent weapons categories exist at least put forth the effort to realize they are separate arguments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40 and 0nelilreb
#264
#264
hndog609 said:
You are conflating arguments. Heller held:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

Why that clear conclusion is somehow obfuscated in your head by there being different categories of weapons is a mystery.

And FYI the whole "assault weapons" thing is a ginned up bit of phrasing to foment an anti-bias. An AR for example is functionally no more than a magazine fed semi-auto. In this it is no different than other magazine fed SA's available to the American public dating back to at least 1905.

If you wish engage the board about the individual right to firearms (lost cause, settled law) or to what extent weapons categories exist at least put forth the effort to realize they are separate arguments.
Click to expand...

You get a like just for using .. Obfuscated 😊
 
#266
#266
hndog609 said:
You are conflating arguments. Heller held:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

Why that clear conclusion is somehow obfuscated in your head by there being different categories of weapons is a mystery.

And FYI the whole "assault weapons" thing is a ginned up bit of phrasing to foment an anti-bias. An AR for example is functionally no more than a magazine fed semi-auto. In this it is no different than other magazine fed SA's available to the American public dating back to at least 1905.

If you wish engage the board about the individual right to firearms (lost cause, settled law) or to what extent weapons categories exist at least put forth the effort to realize they are separate arguments.
Click to expand...
Horse to water and what not. And too slow I’ve already rubbed his ignorant nose in the Heller findings. I even encouraged him to go read up on the Miller sham show but I don’t really think he’s equipped to process what purpose Miller actually served.
 
#267
#267
hndog609 said:
You are conflating arguments. Heller held:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia,"

Why that clear conclusion is somehow obfuscated in your head by there being different categories of weapons is a mystery.

And FYI the whole "assault weapons" thing is a ginned up bit of phrasing to foment an anti-bias. An AR for example is functionally no more than a magazine fed semi-auto. In this it is no different than other magazine fed SA's available to the American public dating back to at least 1905.

If you wish engage the board about the individual right to firearms (lost cause, settled law) or to what extent weapons categories exist at least put forth the effort to realize they are separate arguments.
Click to expand...
I actually have better things to do then take another day to argue this point. Read all my posts you will find no reference to a specific gun. You came in way too late and I have no desire to bang my head against a brick wall trying to convince true constructionists that you can’t read sometimes the Constitution and then ignore the parts that are undeniable that you may disagree. That is the point. I don’t care if you agree or not. Goodbyes.
 
#270
#270
Of course, OP not realizing most P5 college venues are going to some form of screening using metal detectors and even the SEC mandated the use by 2020 (not sure if Covid put that on pause) in basketball and football arenas/stadiums. I saw an article from UT that said TBA would have them in 2019.

If Va Tech or UNC aren't using them, they are the ones that accept responsibility for an active shooter situation. Both of those schools have the money to pay for the detector units and staffing required of them. It's not going to be easy to go into court during a class action lawsuit and say "well, it wasn't mandatory and we put up no weapons signs!"

If a school as small as Boise State can afford it seven years ago, there is no reason anyone in a P5 conference can use the excuse they are too expensive.
 
#271
#271
Grand Vol said:
Of course, OP not realizing most P5 college venues are going to some form of screening using metal detectors and even the SEC mandated the use by 2020 (not sure if Covid put that on pause) in basketball and football arenas/stadiums. I saw an article from UT that said TBA would have them in 2019.

If Va Tech or UNC aren't using them, they are the ones that accept responsibility for an active shooter situation. Both of those schools have the money to pay for the detector units and staffing required of them. It's not going to be easy to go into court during a class action lawsuit and say "well, it wasn't mandatory and we put up no weapons signs!"

If a school as small as Boise State can afford it seven years ago, there is no reason anyone in a P5 conference can use the excuse they are too expensive.
Click to expand...
You’re gonna have a field day with the level of stupid on gun laws in this thread. Hndog already latched on.
 
#272
#272
RobertPellitt said:
Read the law…. It is self explanatory and is exactly as I posted. Reading comprehension is important.
Click to expand...
Common sense is free and ignorance is by choice and its plain as day that you have no common sense. Why do I have to read the law when I just set here and told your DA that a back ground check is done when you buy a gun. Go purchase a gun and see what happens.
 
#273
#273
RobertPellitt said:
I actually have better things to do then take another day to argue this point. Read all my posts you will find no reference to a specific gun. You came in way too late and I have no desire to bang my head against a brick wall trying to convince true constructionists that you can’t read sometimes the Constitution and then ignore the parts that are undeniable that you may disagree. That is the point. I don’t care if you agree or not. Goodbyes.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about?

1) The 2A protects an individual right. That's not merely my opinion it's as settled as law can be in this country.

2) You absolutely used the term "assault weapon" in post #216. I merely framed the disambiguation between the most common civilian form of this contrived terminology vs what would more accurately be defined as NFA weapons. Something you were ambiguously addressing with the "any type of weapon"/"absolute right" part of the post I quoted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and NorthDallas40
#275
#275
tnvols72 said:
Common sense is free and ignorance is by choice and its plain as day that you have no common sense. Why do I have to read the law when I just set here and told your DA that a back ground check is done when you buy a gun. Go purchase a gun and see what happens.
Click to expand...
I just need him to drop “gun show loophole” to hit a bingo on my gun law ignorance bingo card I’m playing in this thread.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol, tnvols72 and AshG
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top