Registration WILL lead to CONFISCATION. Don't trust the takers.
- Thread starter BRUTALITOPS
- Start date
Let's say you register your arms, then we make them illegal and use that registration to come and confiscate them. Which Amendments (other than the 2nd) have been violated?
Also see SCOTUS ruling on US v. Haynes.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Anything that isn't NBC (Nuclear, biological, chemical) because they are useful in a military setting. NBC items are not, and are also regulated by UN treaties that we have signed and ratified.
You should first answer the question posed to you before asking a question of your own.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
It's irrelevant which others are doing it when WE are ALREADY doing it. It's not false equivalency (which is what you're hoping to shout out) when the country in question (America) is already confiscating/confiscated guns based on registration.
I wish. That stupid woman in the Senate who keeps pretending that we can all own fully automatic rifles notwithstanding, we already don't have access to fully auto rifles, let alone fully operational tanks or nuclear weapons. It's the argument of the disingenuous. Nobody is saying we should have nuclear weapons, the thread is about registration and what it leads to.... Didn't CA already try this registration/confiscation thing?
I'm not sure I'm following you here. Why are you excluding NBC from the definition of arms?
I agree if they come take the gun, without due process you have Constitutional issues.
Or I can use a question to teach. The pretense in this one is strong... You should stop trying to tell other people how to hold a conversation. Maybe people will like you in real life then.
BTW, the scotus ruling listed was a direct answer. Why explain something when the SCOTUS has already done it for you?
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
What we're doing here has absolutely nothing to do w/ the equivalency w/ the other countries mentioned. So, it is still a false equivalency, and he can still shout that out.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
As I said, they're not militarily useful, and therefore can be discounted. They are also subject to UN treaties that we have signed and ratified and as per Article 6 of the Constitution, any and all treaties we sign are the same in legal status as the Constitution itself. Therefore we can conclude that they are effectively amendments.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
Classic Damo.
That holding is hardly as broad as you and Damo are suggesting. Registration isn't a violation of the 5th as a general matter.
Yet, here in the USA they already tried this, while you remain ignorant and think that it isn't a violation, the SCOTUS disagrees with you. (I think the ruling was some time in the mid to late 60s.)
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
This 8-1 decision (with only Chief Justice Earl Warren dissenting) is, depending on your view of Fifth Amendment, either a courageous application of the intent of the self-incrimination clause, or evidence that the Supreme Court had engaged in reductio ad absurdum of the Fifth Amendment. Under this ruling, a person illegally possessing a firearm, under either federal or state law, could not be punished for failing to register it. [4]
Consider a law that requires registration of firearms: a convicted felon can not be convicted for failing to register a gun, because it is illegal under Federal law for a felon to possess a firearm; but a person who can legally own a gun, and fails to register it, can be punished. In short, the person at whom, one presumes, such a registration law is aimed, is the one who cannot be punished, and yet, the person at whom such a registration law is not principally aimed (i.e., the law-abiding person), can be punished.
And classic Onceler is to wade in, say something about a person in the thread, and be entirely incapable of talking about ideas. This post is a prime example.
Oh, so I should have put the ruling first? Why are you and Onceler incapable of holding a conversation about someTHING rather than someONE?
It is slightly annoying, but I do know that when the Siamese twins enter the conversation they will be saying something about me, won't talk about the topic, and that it means my argument has been effective.
You're going to have to explain your logic on the bold there. I mean, NBC are militarily useful. Mustard gas is highly effective. As is anthrax.
Also, too, treaties cannot supercede the Constitution. Look it up. So if you have the right to bear arms, and arms is deemed to include canisters of mustard gas, the Senate can't take that right away by ratifying a treaty banning chemical weapons.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
I'm discussing the topic as well. I just couldn't resist pointing that out about your post.
So interesting that you note that about us, but ignore your brethren when all they post is that Jarod is an idiot or stupid. Methinks it's because they have an "L" after their name.