.....
So military veterans should have more rights than other citizens?
They also didn't have electricity, phones, TV, Internet, tasers, cars, motorcycles, tear gas, hedge funds, nuclear weapons, or vaccines. So far, I think the Constitution has stood the test of time well, even though it is often ignored or corrupted. The AR-15 is the musket of our time, just like a 15 round semi-automatic handgun is the blunderbuss/Duval/Sharpe pistol of our time, just like the car is the horse and carriage of our time. Free speech on the Internet is protected now the same as on parchment paper hundreds of years ago. During THEIR time, their guns were the most dangerous personal/common weapon they would encounter on the streets. You will note the Constitution says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" it doesn't say "to keep and bear arms only of the type or power of this writing."
What sort of motorcycle riding requires 0-60 in 3 seconds?
What sort of car driving requires cruise control?
What sort of house living requires 3 bathrooms?
Which would be what? The infamous "gun show loophole"?? I would be glad to shred that to pieces with facts and statistics, if needed...
I can tell you are completely unfamiliar with what was done, why people are upset, and why it is being done away with. If a veteran had their income check sent to someone else that helps with managing their finances, THAT WAS BEING REPORTED AS MENTAL ILLNESS! And to add insult to injury, there was no due process in removing someone's Constitutionally guaranteed rights!
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/444582/no-gop-did-not-just-repeal-background-check-system-or-give-guns-mentally-il
If they can do that, what is next on the list of "mental illness?" Telling your doctor you are depressed? Frustrated? Tired? Telling a nurse? Telling a healthcare clerk?
What DOES constitute "mental illness" is being in a mental hospital or being actually CLINICALLY diagnosed with a RECOGNIZED mental illness by a competent doctor. But that isn't what was happening.
In this matter, I trust military veterans to have the proper moral compass and training needed for responsible gun ownership. Remember the "well regulated militia" aspect of the Second Amendment?
What do any of the wonderful (and not so wonderful) innovations that you enumerated have to do with interfering with the benefits of the Bill of Rights. If the US Constitution is a living document the right conferred to bear arms should not be an unfettered right. Cigarettes are not illegal today solely because they have been in use for centuries. Knowing what we now know about its harmful effects, it would be banned if attempted to introduce it as a new product today.
Private sales on the internet. For example, the Las Vegas gunman was able to illegally purchase armor-piercing bullets and the vendor got nabbed only because his fingerprints were found on the shipment.
In this matter, I trust military veterans to have the proper moral compass and training needed for responsible gun ownership. Remember the "well regulated militia" aspect of the Second Amendment?
In this matter, I trust military veterans to have the proper moral compass and training needed for responsible gun ownership.
Remember the "well regulated militia" aspect of the Second Amendment?
What do any of the wonderful (and not so wonderful) innovations that you enumerated have to do with interfering with the benefits of the Bill of Rights. If the US Constitution is a living document
That is a preamble and has nothing to do with the right. Almost every Constitutional scholar and the Supreme court, agree on that.
Meaningless analogies and I can give trite answers to each of them. You did not answer my question.
Private sales on the internet
If a SS recepient (not just a veteran) had their finances being managed due to a mental impairment then they would get flagged. By pushing veterans as the rallying point, the entire "mentally ill" restriction was rolled back?
Ahh.....the familiar slippery slope argument.
For example, the Las Vegas gunman was able to illegally purchase armor-piercing bullets and the vendor got nabbed only because his fingerprints were found on the shipment.
Do you have a link to this? I'd like to know more about illegal "armor-piercing" .223 bullets. I could be wrong but I don't think such a thing exists. Regular ball ammo might be considered "armor-piercing" because it doesn't mushroom as much as a hollow point or soft point. And I suppose some states have some sort of ban on them but not Colorado or Texas. I know NJ has a ban on hollow points, but that is the exact opposite of armor-piercing. But don't you gun control types want to ban hollow point as well as "armor-piercing"? Wouldn't that be a total ban on ammunition?
Also, almost any centerfire rifle ammo will penetrate kevlar body armor without military ceramic plates. Therefor wouldn't all hunting ammo be considered "armor-piercing"?
.223 caliber was the only weapon in Paddock's arsenal?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-las-vegas-shooting-ammunition-seller-20180202-story.html
I do not know if this is unique to us "gun control types", but I was sickened to see pics of the PoS from the Parkland shooting being arraigned with his public defender appearing to comfort him with her arm over his shoulder. Is that part of the job or did her maternal instincts kick into high gear?It looked like she was trying to set the framework for having the killer be perceived as a victim.
I do not know if this is unique to us "gun control types", but I was sickened to see pics of the PoS from the Parkland shooting being arraigned with his public defender appearing to comfort him with her arm over his shoulder. Is that part of the job or did her maternal instincts kick into high gear?
Do you have a link to this? I'd like to know more about illegal "armor-piercing" .223 bullets. I could be wrong but I don't think such a thing exists. Regular ball ammo might be considered "armor-piercing" because it doesn't mushroom as much as a hollow point or soft point. And I suppose some states have some sort of ban on them but not Colorado or Texas. I know NJ has a ban on hollow points, but that is the exact opposite of armor-piercing. But don't you gun control types want to ban hollow point as well as "armor-piercing"? Wouldn't that be a total ban on ammunition?
Also, almost any centerfire rifle ammo will penetrate kevlar body armor without military ceramic plates. Therefor wouldn't all hunting ammo be considered "armor-piercing"?
Meaningless analogies and I can give trite answers to each of them. You did not answer my question.
Private sales on the internet. For example, the Las Vegas gunman was able to illegally purchase armor-piercing bullets and the vendor got nabbed only because his fingerprints were found on the shipment.
If a SS recepient (not just a veteran) had their finances being managed due to a mental impairment then they would get flagged. By pushing veterans as the rallying point, the entire "mentally ill" restriction was rolled back?
Ahh.....the familiar slippery slope argument.
That's a very good point that's often overlooked.
So what is the definition of "militia"
"(in the US) all able-bodied civilians eligible by law for military service"
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=militia&oq=militia&aqs=chrome..69i57&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Ok so maybe a good starting point is to remove weapons from anybody who isn't eligible by law for military service.
That's fully in line with the word & spirit of the second amendment isn't it ?
<snip>