9 dead, 43 injured in Chicago Memorial Day weekend shootings

Yes, a fee, infringement. Are those fees the same for handguns or single shot, shot guns?

 

What's clearly covered in the 2nd is...

“A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

...
Any interpretations that inhibit the right of the people to keep and bear arms, is an infringement.

 

that is a rather specious view of what the founders intended. and we both know it. and you play that game because you want to pretend that banning nukes is no different an infringement than the ones that you support-which impact clearly bearable self defensive-useful weapons

 

@dairyair : can you tell us what firearms are clearly protected by the second?

 

All. And not just firearms.
The 2A says 'arms'.

 

it also notes KEEP AND BEAR.


so you oppose any and all restrictions on any type of weapons?

 

According to the 2cd it would be any Able bodied American

The word Militia, seals the deal in the Second Amendment ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Long as we have a country with and open border policies the 2A will always be the decisive point of the SCJ decisions! It's safer to have a population armed then not, need proof, ask Ukrainians ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

You must have missed the 1000s of times where I said per the strict reading of the 2A. Or knowing your post style, you just ignore those words so you have something to argue about.

And I said almost as many times, everyone is for some types of infringements on some arms.
I say it's a line in the sand most have.
Just that there's an individual line in the sand for each individual.

But again, you just ignore those words also. And make up your own false projections to many posters. Kind of a form of trolling.

 

and why is it you never EVER tell us where YOUR LINE is?

 

Now do totals please. The per capita is great, how many black kids must die before the left and their insane city governments act with law enforcement to enforce the damn law. How many, give me the number it will take for you to denounce these far left politicians that are not allowing the police to make their city safe? I would assume you'll say there's not a number, but I'll let you answer. The left specifically told us gun laws would solve the murder in chicago, they told us the big bad police were the issue and hiring Peacekeepers would solve it, they told us poor blacks in Chicago are picked on by the law so letting smaller crimes go would help the poor and reduce violent felonies, they told us drugs aren't an issue and shouldn't be prosecuted and that would lower the gang killings. Hell the Chicago mayor the week before memorial day said they were putting peace keepers everywhere during the holiday and that people would be safe, talk about out of touch. Every single thing you told us was a lie, it isn't working anywhere, and when are you on the left going to drop the f'ing politics and pivot to make these cities safer for the sake of the black children specifically.

 

Because my opinion is not a topic of discussion.

I have stated over and over, I am not worried about losing rights to my semi automatic 30-06.
Since that is not a worry at this time or even in the forseeible future, I don't see where my opinion matters. It's never going to change another person.

 

I find it amusing that anti gun posters have such a reticence to actually tell us where they stand.

 

Per capital is the true measure of comparing apples to apples.

But a post just a couple down from the one you replied to has this.

 

Maybe because you just like making up crap and think everyone who doesn't agree with you 100% is anti gun.

It's a flaw in your posting style.

 

well when you constantly play duck and weave and refuse to state a real position, it is rather disingenuous for you to complain that others see you as anti gun. And most anti gunners are not 100% anti gun-they want their leaders and masters to be well armed and many want to have guns-they just don't want conservatives to have them.

 

I'm impressed by your mind reading ability of people who died hundreds of years ago

 

actually it takes no mind reading but rather an HONEST understanding of the environment in which the bill of rights was created, and a rather well developed understanding of both the theory of natural law and rights and constitutional theory.

 

You just don't get it.
A person's opinion is not a topic in most of the threads. But you do you and keep derailing and throw out ad homs. You've very good at it.

 

so your opinion has no relevance to your OPINIONS on the issues being discussed. OK. your evasions continue to prove the validity of my signature

 

I care very little about some gun control movement. Because I am not worried about the gun control movement. Which I've stated often only for you to do you and ignore.

 

that is belied by the fact that you have posted hundreds of times on gun control threads

 

Never about banning any.
I just note the line in the sand so many proponents are good with.

I'll be sure to give an opinion when semi auto hunting rifles are threatened.

 

you want to ban semi auto magazine fed rifles

 

Anti 2A people take note: It’s possible Hunter Biden will defend the gun charges against him by saying he has a right to have a gun even as a drug user.

Could Hunter Biden be the next poster child for Second Amendment rights?

His lawyers have already told Justice Department officials that, if their client is charged with the gun crime, they will challenge the law under the Second Amendment, according to a person familiar with the private discussions granted anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/01/hunter-biden-supreme-court-second-amendment-00099544

 

this could subject the 18 USC 922 (GCA of 1968 to jeopardy before the USSC