Why We Need Gun Restrictions

domer76 said:
Here’s the way it works, bitch.

Dump all the local laws. Federalize them. Every firearm violation becomes a federal crime. You know how those work? No mercy.

Got a gun you shouldn’t have? Federal sentence for you and everyone else involved with you obtaining that weapon. Including any “legitimate” business associated with that weapon.

Product liability. You don’t see tobacco ads anywhere these days do you? Dry up gun ads same way.

Identify and track every gun transaction. Including your sale to crazy Uncle Bill. Fail to do that? Return to those federal violations.
Click to expand...

:lolup:Idiot thinks that CRIMINALS will now decide NOT to use a gun because it is Federalized. :laugh: Moron.
 
blackascoal said:
Wouldn't they need their guns so they can shoot 'mouthy black kids' in the head whenever they feel like it.

Surely you endorse that.
Click to expand...

Right wingers and whites don't shoot young black men, that is done by other young black men 96% of the time. Yet you only care about the 4%. Why race hustler?
 
Truth Detector said:
I pretty much did. Again, if you live in a crime infested cesspool and do nothing when people steal from you; expect the word to get out and a LOT more of it to occur.
Click to expand...

Nope, you did not answer my question. It's actually pretty simple, it's a yes or no. Do you believe deadly force is warranted in shoplifting situations? Yes, or no?
 
Truth Detector said:
I pretty much did. Again, if you live in a crime infested cesspool and do nothing when people steal from you; expect the word to get out and a LOT more of it to occur.
Click to expand...

Nope, you did not answer my question. It's actually pretty simple, it's a yes or no. Do you believe deadly force is warranted in shoplifting situations? Yes, or no?
 
Celticguy said:
A person could enter the store with the intention of nicking a Baby Ruth get spotted freak out and shoot the shopkeeper.
There are unknowable dynamics at play in any situation. To pretend otherwise is foolish.
Click to expand...

So are you advising shop keepers to shoot shoplifters on sight? Very bad advice. Your hypothetical is just plain silly.
 
countryboy said:
Nope, you did not answer my question. It's actually pretty simple, it's a yes or no. Do you believe deadly force is warranted in shoplifting situations? Yes, or no?
Click to expand...

I think, in retrospect, that he should have grabbed another hatchet off the shelf and worked him over with that instead.
 
Rune said:
Where in the Constitution is the unenrolled militia ended?
The unenrolled Militia is all men between 18 and 45.
Click to expand...

Where in the Constitution is this "unenrolled" Militia? The Constitution says "A well regulated Militia", and that would require an enrollment.

The Militia ended at the same time the people accepted the permanent standing army we now have. If not for that then cowards like you, Trump, Cheney, Romney, and even Clinton, etc., would have served in some branch of the military.

"In 1814 letter Jefferson wrote of standing armies: “The Greeks and Romans had no standing armies, yet they defended themselves. The Greeks by their laws, and the Romans by the spirit of their people, took care to put into the hands of their rulers no such engine of oppression as a standing army. Their system was to make every man a soldier and oblige him to repair to the standard of his country whenever that was reared. This made them invincible; and the same remedy will make us so.”

If the writers of the had Constitution embraced a standing army during times of peace, then there would be no need for a regulated militia, and no need for the 2nd Amendment. Instead, they openly opposed a standing army during times of peace. In the Constitution there are no time limits on the power of Congress to raise money, and pay for, anything except an Army. We can have a Navy forever. We can have roads or bridges or post offices or pretty much anything else that supports the "general welfare" without limit and in perpetuity. But an Army? That had to be re-evaluated every two years, when all spending for the past two years of army was zeroed out. It's right there in Article 1, Section 8, line twelve reads that Congress has the power: "To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years."
 
Celticguy said:
The constitution enumerates the rights. And in this case further stipulates that it may not be infringed.
The law dating back for thousands of years on up through Common Law prohibits you from killing.
Ask your mom to explain it to you sometime.
Click to expand...

Have your mommy read to you what I posted, and then maybe by using third grade teaching methods, you may grasp the meaning of what I wrote.

a moral or legal entitlement to have or obtain something or to act in a certain way.

I never said that murder was ok. I did say that society has taught some that they are entitled to do so e.g cops.

Is that too hard for your wee little mind to comprehend? Should I draw you a picture?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top