Reply With Quote
actually they have declared war on him..
Hard to tell who declared war on who... I mean, we still don't know what this 'gun control' will amount to, but some folk sure have wasted no time making a stinker out of it...
actually they have declared war on him..
A completely ridiculous comparison, tbh... owning human beings and forcing them to work for you against their will is a LOT different than owning an inanimate object that you are licensed to possess....
Slaves were considered property...
SCOTUS already stated that's not cons utional... so whoever 'some' are, are not going to get that.
Yes, in an effort by slaveowners and their apologists to obscure the guilt and shame surrounding the fact that they were owning and abusing human beings...
Again, completely dissimilar to someone being licensed to own an inanimate object....
If guns were living things with feelings and their owners were keeping them against their will and assaulting them regularly, your comparison would make sense... instead, it's a dumbass take, per par from gun-grabbers....
Exactly!
But then it's not a law anymore... so in a way, the first part is actually correct.
Gov will just do what New York is doing. Limit magazines to 7 rounds and tell everyone they've got 90 days to figure it out, making every handgun illegal besides a 1911. No way magazine manufacturers can redesign and crank out new 7 round clips for every single handgun that's not a 1911. They are basically disarming them.
The problem is the damage done before such laws are struck down.
Don't you think that if a law isn't clearly cons utional, that it shouldn't be crafted in the first place?
But New York didn't make 'every handgun illegal besides a 1911'... and New York isn't taking away any guns from capable owners... the penalty for having a mag with over 7 bullets is a misdemeanor...
Plus for the federal government to ins ute that it would need a law from Congress, which is not happening with *this* Congress...
That's why courts award remedies. So you agree that federal law trumps state law in all cases now?
So following along with this logic,... Colorado peace officers would be allowed to arrest DEA Agents enforcing Federal marijuana laws....
They'll shoot at eachother... with 7 round magazines, of course.
SCOTUS balance of power can shift in 4 years.
we can only hope
Handguns in New York are already illegal unless licensed and registered.
So what? SCOTUS also uses precedent. The precedent is all there.
Now, if you think the SCOTUS is going declare uncons utional any law banning rocket launchers, I think that's not going to happen. They've been clear which kind of weapons are protected (most of which are semi-auto).
And back four years later.
So they're not illegal, they simply have to be registered. Registration is permissible and doesn't infringe on the 2nd amendment IIRC.
Now?
I get pretty tired of your inserting nonexistent views you think I have. You do so, then think you won something, when I refuse to answer stupid questions.
I have always agreed federal law trumps state law, when it is legal.
I asked you a question. I get pretty tired of you dodging them.
I did.
Now bug off until you have reasonable non-leading questions to ask.
make me
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
smh