Reply With Quote
Ginsberg vs New York. Look it up.
Yes, and legal to own. You've been down this road before, do you have a point this time?
Ginsberg vs New York. Look it up.
sure we have you can own anything with a permit but there is no RIGHT to own it. They can choose to decline your request for a permit which makes the weapon illegal. you have no recourse at that point.
we are talking about rights here jackass. you understand the difference between a right and a privilege?
That rights. and the law requiring a permit is uncons utional.
You're the one wanting to argue the Cons ution as it was originally written. As originally written, everyone regardless of age should have the right to pornography.
Yep. That was uncons utional too. Our sage founders explicitly provided a way to change the cons ution in the cons utional amendment process. Look it up statist.
Yeah, move the goal posts some more.
Is it legal to fire off a rocket launcher?
we aren't talking about rights here, we are witnessing the butthurt of an antigunner play a semantics game with a five year olds right to bear arms.
It amazes me that a few of you will turn a blind eye on the parents involved just to push your pussy laden agendas. Gun, knife, dog, fire, bathtub.......anything could have killed that child unattended, this one is solely on the parents.
If you two are so scared of guns, write your senators, attend rallies, donate money. I know I did, and guess what, my side is winning. Instead of doing these things you just log on to the Internet and and moan and come off as little whiners. Have either of you written your senators and representatives? Shown up to any anti-gun rallies lately? Donated any money to the Brady campaign lately? Nahhhhh.......Internet whining is all you got.
Scalia who is the most conservative justice out there has commented on this and when pressed on something that could be used to shoot down planes said that it was not necessarily a right. I get what you are saying about a literal interpretation and he said that anything handheld in his opinion is protected but when certain specifics were mentioned he would not say that.
Howitzers are armaments as well and the cons ution does not say small arms so from a literal interpretation those should be protected as well.
We are talking about the bill of rights, dimwit. And you have no idea what I have done or not done. Its irrelevant. Keep guessing though its entertaining watching you build strawmen.
My first post on this, never moved anything.
What 5 year old has his own rifle? What parents leave said rifle in the corner of the living room loaded and unattended? These sorry excuses for parents need to both place their lips around the barrel of that .22 and pull the trigger for their gross negligence.
Can you "bear" a howitzer? Didn't think so.
SuperFuzzyTroll can lift any strange argument...
The post I quoted you on was different than your response.
If you want to say you screwed up and meant something different, that would be fine.
And puritanical statism much like puritanical libertarianism is nonexistent and impossible. Anyway were about to head out so you kats take of yourselves.
And where does mr Scalia derive the authority to interpret the holy cons ution?
No, we are talking about parents who leave a loaded gun in the room with an unattended child, not whether or not the five year old had a right to bear that arm. And you want to talk about building strawmen? For s sake it doesn't get more strawman than that.
Depends on your definition of bear. Possession and bear have been conflated in legal argument.
that is not the only thing being discussed and that is besides the point. you don't get to dictate what or what not is talked about.
I'm asking because I don't know. Anyone?
Found it. I still don't see anyone here that says a five year old should have a rifle. Is there something I missed?
If they are legal to own and you have enough property I would assume so. If not it would be pretty stupid to purchase something you couldn't use. I have no clue. Why not ask the gun expert fuzzy?
CC and TB both said they were good with guns when they were six.
If you want to nit pik that it's not five, then you're just playing six year old games
I think a five year old should be able to own a rifle until you ammend the cons ution to say that 5 year olds right to bear arms can be infringed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions