kallend 2,148
Recommended Posts
QuoteI'd actually be ok with that provided I don't have to register my firearms. The government does not need to know which firearms I own.
Do they need to know which car you are driving? Provided your registrations system is the same like ours, you and your car are registered.
Why not doing the same with firearms? What to hide here?
dudeist skydiver # 3105
kallend 2,148
QuoteI'd actually be ok with that provided I don't have to register my firearms. The government does not need to know which firearms I own.
Kind of hard regulating a well regulated militia if you don't know what arms they have.
Anyway, what are you afraid of? The Supremes just affirmed your (not unlimited) right to own a firearm, so confiscation is off the table.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Ron 10
QuoteThat's EXACTLY what I'm suggesting. The law says nutcases may not buy guns. And I've proposed a way of enforcing it.
No you are not suggesting enforcing the current laws at all. You are suggesting NEW laws that in YOUR opinion are not intrusions into other people's rights.
While at the same time bitching up a storm about you losing YOUR rights in other areas. You are hypocritical in the fact you cry about your rights, but are willing to step on others rights.
QuoteAfter all, as Scalia told us, gun ownership is not an unlimited right.
And he listed a few cases such as criminals and the mentally ill. He DID also say nothing reasonable about a BAN....
QuoteYou do realize you contradicted yourself within that one post, right?
Only contradiction is from your views...It is OK to step on gun owners rights, but not the rights of guys that have model rockets.
QuoteLet's hear YOUR ideas, Ron.
Actually enforce the current rules. We have enough gun laws on the books...We just don't follow them and no amount of additional regulations will fix that. The gun control act of 1968 was pretty good except the "sporting clause" part.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
QuoteQuoteI'd actually be ok with that provided I don't have to register my firearms. The government does not need to know which firearms I own.
Kind of hard regulating a well regulated militia if you don't know what arms they have.
Anyway, what are you afraid of? The Supremes just affirmed your (not unlimited) right to own a firearm, so confiscation is off the table.
because I like my automatic.
Also our understanding of the 2nd Amendment differs. My understanding is we, the people, have the right to keep and bear arms to defend ourselves from the well organized militia which is necessary to the security of a free state. Not because we, the people, are considered the militia.
www.FourWheelerHB.com
Quote
Kind of hard regulating a well regulated militia if you don't know what arms they have.
not if you actually understand the meanings of those words.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuote
***Let's hear YOUR ideas, Ron.
Actually enforce the current rules. We have enough gun laws on the books...We just don't follow them and no amount of additional regulations will fix that. The gun control act of 1968 was pretty good except the "sporting clause" part.
Lame - that's no information at all - give us DETAILS of how you would go about that.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuote
Kind of hard regulating a well regulated militia if you don't know what arms they have.
not if you actually understand the meanings of those words.
Still can't honestly answer my very simple question.
Funny for a guy who is so quick to shout "EVASION" about others. Do I detect a double standard?
(Anyway, what happened to that vacation of yours that would prevent your further discussion - or was that just another excuse not to answer a simple question?)
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
billvon 3,116
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
> My understanding is we, the people, have the right to keep and bear
>arms to defend ourselves from the well organized militia which is
>necessary to the security of a free state.
I like it! Unique and fresh, with a distinct "we're fighting for our freedom against the evil government" angle.
But I greatly prefer the interpretation that we are only have a constitutional right to use bear arms, rather than ordinary human-designed arms. Once bears start making weapons, though, we're set.
>arms to defend ourselves from the well organized militia which is
>necessary to the security of a free state.
I like it! Unique and fresh, with a distinct "we're fighting for our freedom against the evil government" angle.
But I greatly prefer the interpretation that we are only have a constitutional right to use bear arms, rather than ordinary human-designed arms. Once bears start making weapons, though, we're set.
Quote"we're fighting for our freedom against the evil government" angle.
Wow is that so hard to believe considering the authors finished doing just that? Yeah you right...it couldn't possibly be based on their most recent experience.
www.FourWheelerHB.com
Have a nice evening, bubba.
juanesky 0
Quote
Do you, like JR, think a few massacres are the price others have to pay for your recreationalgunCAR use?
Here fixed it for you.
Lets ban cars!
"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon
rushmc 23
Quote>I see a difference here Bill. In the case of the car all you list is mainly to
>collect money, not control ownership.
You're kidding, right? Have you ever heard of:
-revoking a driver's license due to speeding or drunk drivingI think we were talking about cars not drivers
-liens being placed against a car's titlehas nothing to do with the ownership, just the loan
-safety and emissions requirements for registration
>Again, what you list here is not to control whether or not you can skydive
Try jumping into Washington, DC with a BASE rig and see whether or not the rules are in place to control where, when and how you skydive.seems a bit off the topic but if you say so
>most if not all of the regulation you list above it to make sure you are trained
>or put in place to collect money, not control whether or not you can own or
>participate.
As I have demonstrated, it is clearly both.
I think you stretch it a bit, but I can see where you are coming from. I just dont agree
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
rushmc 23
QuoteQuoteI'd actually be ok with that provided I don't have to register my firearms. The government does not need to know which firearms I own.
Do they need to know which car you are driving? Provided your registrations system is the same like ours, you and your car are registered.
Why not doing the same with firearms? What to hide here?
Is automobile ownership a listed constitutional right?
No, I dont think so
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln
billvon 3,116
>Wow is that so hard to believe considering the authors finished doing just
>that?
Well, given that we have explicitly forbidden people to do that (see the event known as the United States Civil War) I don't think many other people agree with you.
>that?
Well, given that we have explicitly forbidden people to do that (see the event known as the United States Civil War) I don't think many other people agree with you.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuote
Do you, like JR, think a few massacres are the price others have to pay for your recreationalgunCAR use?
Here fixed it for you.
Lets ban cars!
STRAWMAN: No-one proposes banning guns.
I'm unaware of anyone with a history of mental problems buying a car in order to conduct a massacre. Perhaps you'll provide a cite.
On the other hand, guns seem to be a very popular choice with loonies.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,148
QuoteHave a nice evening, bubba.
Same to you, Artful Dodger.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuoteQuoteI'd actually be ok with that provided I don't have to register my firearms. The government does not need to know which firearms I own.
Do they need to know which car you are driving? Provided your registrations system is the same like ours, you and your car are registered.
Why not doing the same with firearms? What to hide here?
Is automobile ownership a listed constitutional right?
No, I dont think so
But gun ownership is "not unlimited", and the Supremes have already given their seal of approval to restrictions. So your argument falls flat on it face.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Ron 10
QuoteLame - that's no information at all - give us DETAILS of how you would go about that.
Actually it is all the info you need. Enforce the current system means to enforce the current system.
Pretty simple really.
You just don't like it since you don't get to try and force feel good legislation on people.
I find it SO funny after you tried to ream me on the WL debate.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
Ron 10
QuoteBut gun ownership is "not unlimited", and the Supremes have already given their seal of approval to restrictions. So your argument falls flat on it face
And they listed some of those restrictions.
1. Can't be a felon.
2. Can't be insane.
3. Can't carry in a court or school.
How many others did they list John?
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
billvon 3,116
>1. Can't be a felon.
>2. Can't be insane.
>3. Can't carry in a court or school.
And, implicitly, must be an adult.
>2. Can't be insane.
>3. Can't carry in a court or school.
And, implicitly, must be an adult.
juanesky 0
No, but cars kill more people than guns in america, so using your tactics, and logic, we should ban cars, as they are dangerous.
How about Iraq? Any comments on how bad things are over there?
"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon
kallend 2,148
QuoteNo, but cars kill more people than guns in america, so using your tactics, and logic, we should ban cars, as they are dangerous.
?
Beating the same silly strawman over and over again doesn't impress anyone with your debating skill. It's not even a clever strawman.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
kallend 2,148
QuoteQuoteLame - that's no information at all - give us DETAILS of how you would go about that.
Actually it is all the info you need. Enforce the current system means to enforce the current system.
Pretty simple really.
.
HOW. Stop evading the question. HOW will you identify the mentally disturbed potential purchaser?
Do you think a NICS check would be adequate for someone wanting to purchase a machine gun?
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Can't honestly answer the question, eh? Thought not.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites