Fox News poll: 67% of Americans want ban on assault weapons
- Thread starter Bugsy McGurk
- Start date
freyasman
Senator
Do you realize that insisting really really hard, that something is true, does not actually make it true?
freyasman
Senator
Can you cite the law prohibiting them?
Denying that something is true does not make it not true.Do you realize that insisting really really hard, that something is true, does not actually make it true?
If you disagree with what i said, man up and refute it. Don't just say "no its not!" Like a child.
18 U.S. Code§ 2332g. Covers SAM's and RPG's
Machine guns were heavily restricted the from civilian ownership by the National Firearms Act of 1934.
Etc.
Did you really not know that?
freyasman
Senator
These laws are an infringement of the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
Therefore, they are unconstitutional.
No matter what you or anyone else claims.
freyasman
Senator
So, legal to own if one jumps through some hoops first, rather than not legal.
Facts matter.
People disagree. The founding fathers knew they would. So they set up the Supreme court in the constitution to be the arbiters of such disagreements.
According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court decides if laws are constitutional. No one else.
The supreme court has deemed that such restrictions are not a violation of the second.
This is how the constitution works. You seem completely ignorant of that.
You should learn or find a country that suits you better.
Last edited:
No, it is not legal for a civillian to buy or own a SAM or an RPG......no hoops make it legal for a civillianSo, legal to own if one jumps through some hoops first, rather than not legal.
Facts matter.
freyasman
Senator
The only folks that disagree are those out to fvck people out of their rights. This is done in a blatantly obvious manner to see how much people in a given area, or of a given demographic or social class, are willing to tolerate. It's a probe to test the resolve of the defiant ones.
freyasman
Senator
You might wanna check on that.
Lots of people disagree liar. That is why such laws got majority votes but not unanimous votes.
The founding fathers knew Americans would disagree. Often. About all sorts of things.
That is why they designed our three part gov. With checks and balances and the supreme court as arbiter of the constitutionality of laws.
I did. I cited the law.You might wanna check on that.
freyasman
Senator
Except it's unchecked, and unbalanced......
I love the system the way it was designed, but that's not how it is, or has been practiced, for a very long time.
freyasman
Senator
Read it again; the people who invent and develop these things are civilians.
We elect our representatives. They pass laws. The president, who we also elected, signs it or vetoes it. And if challenged, the supreme court decides if it violates the constitution and bill of rights. It is overturned or upheld accordingly.
That is how it works. It is how it was designed to work.
freyasman
Senator
No, it's not.
You are grasping at straws.
They are under military or government contract.
They cannot own one as a civilian.......you know...... keep it at their house, for personal use.
Constitutional Sheepdog
][][][%er!!!!!!!
The man who invented the carbine created and built it for himself while in prison.
Yes it is. Exactly. If you disagree specify what is different, what is not working ..... Hint. You can't just say you don't like the outcome. The process is working as designed. No one ever guaranteed you it would always work in your favor.
freyasman
Senator
Here's a pretty good proposal for a law though;
http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2019/08/sauce-for-goose.html
From the link;
"Sauce for the goose ...
... being sauce for the gander and all that.
You know what I'd like to see?
Red Flag laws for Congress.
Any Congresscritter says or does, something unConstitutional, anyone should be able to file a Red Flag violation and have that politician's powers to write bills, attend sessions of Congress, vote, draw a taxpayer-funded paycheque, live in a mansion in Washington DC, or anything else tied to the job of being a Congresscritter immediately suspended.
There would be a hearing within fourteen days before a judge in their home district, where the Representative or Senator would be given the opportunity to show where in the Constitution what they said, or the law they proposed, or the action they did, was explicitly authorised, and if they can show that, their rights to all the goodies of being an elected representative of the People would be restored.
If they can't, then they can sit at home for a year and twiddle their thumbs. Not allowed into the Capitol, no drawing a paycheque, no voting, no proposing bills, nothing added to their pension funds, zip, zero, NADA to do with being an elected official.
And their party doesn't get to fill that slot. Their party doesn't get to vote on their behalf. Their party doesn't get to help them with re-election.
No, that Congresscritter, and the seat they occupy, goes into the penalty box for a year.
After a year, if their term in office hasn't expired, they can take up their duties again.
Unless, and until, they mention violating the Constitution again, and someone files another Red Flag complaint.
Bastards.
LawDog"
http://thelawdogfiles.blogspot.com/2019/08/sauce-for-goose.html
From the link;
"Sauce for the goose ...
... being sauce for the gander and all that.
You know what I'd like to see?
Red Flag laws for Congress.
Any Congresscritter says or does, something unConstitutional, anyone should be able to file a Red Flag violation and have that politician's powers to write bills, attend sessions of Congress, vote, draw a taxpayer-funded paycheque, live in a mansion in Washington DC, or anything else tied to the job of being a Congresscritter immediately suspended.
There would be a hearing within fourteen days before a judge in their home district, where the Representative or Senator would be given the opportunity to show where in the Constitution what they said, or the law they proposed, or the action they did, was explicitly authorised, and if they can show that, their rights to all the goodies of being an elected representative of the People would be restored.
If they can't, then they can sit at home for a year and twiddle their thumbs. Not allowed into the Capitol, no drawing a paycheque, no voting, no proposing bills, nothing added to their pension funds, zip, zero, NADA to do with being an elected official.
And their party doesn't get to fill that slot. Their party doesn't get to vote on their behalf. Their party doesn't get to help them with re-election.
No, that Congresscritter, and the seat they occupy, goes into the penalty box for a year.
After a year, if their term in office hasn't expired, they can take up their duties again.
Unless, and until, they mention violating the Constitution again, and someone files another Red Flag complaint.
Bastards.
LawDog"
Latest posts
-
Biden claims uncle was eaten by Cannibals…- Latest: Bugsy McGurk
-
-
John Edwards precedent corners the rats...
- Latest: Jack4freedom