Supreme Court asked to recognize a Second Amendment right to sell guns

You take it too far.

I am wrong about neither

 

asked and answered.

 

no they don't.

 

which has no relevance to the fact that they have been.

 

you have a right to possess guns in the home for self-defense.

you have no natural right to be involved in the business of selling firearms for profit, unregulated and unlicensed.

 

Get this straight folks, you have NO natural right to engage in any business, unregulated.

Society has the right and even obligation to make sure you are not selling faulty, dangerous,unhealthy garbage to the public.

Society has the right to make sure you are not evading sales taxes, international and inter-state regulations.

Society has the right to make sure you are following fair and just business practises and not ripping off your customers.

so yeah, you have the right to keep guns at home on your personal property, to protect yourself and and your loved ones.

but thats where the 2nd Amend end.

 

Do you have any court cases to support your argument?

The business owner wasn't asking to be unregulated. The issue is that the regulation in question is overly restrictive and does not protect the public from "faulty, dangerous,unhealthy garbage", nor was the business owner "evading sales taxes, international and inter-state regulations", and would be following "fair and just business practices".

 

You have provided no credible refutations of questions raised about full auto in this universe and any assertion you have done so is completely false. For instance, regarding a Sten auto sear, or any auto sear controlling the ROF, show the post numbers where you have refuted credibly anything or demonstrated you understand the ‘physics’ of full auto... then too, how do you explain autos that have no sear? Without evidence to that effect, you are propagating an outright lie.
What color are unicorns in your universe?

 

Are you against all zoning restrictions then?

 

you know perfectly well this is a lie.

 

Saying so doesn’t mean it is. Show me the posts or better, simply do what you were originally asked, show how an auto sear controls ROF; it should be a simple description of mechanical function... if you don’t or more likely can’t you continue to affirm yourself as a Troll.The closest you came was showing a Sten sear you Googled that wasn’t a auto sear, but you didn’t have the knowledge to know, nor did you know a Sten’s bolt doesn’t lock on closing... a huge clue on full auto functionality and what actually controls ROF. Your lack of integrity is showing and leaking on the floor. As I suggested, your continued false assertion you have credibly refuted the question of your knowledge of full auto functioning and ROF questions transfers to credibility of any post you make.
I find it interesting you have almost 39,000 posts and fewer than 1,300 likes...I don’t wonder why.

 

true. It actually being a lie though, that you know perfectly well is a lie, does.

 

The Supreme Court often takes cases that are blatantly misruled, there is a reason the 9th Circus is the most overturned court in the country...

 

Prove I lied.
I know I haven’t, even by mistake in your case; my personal code won’t allow it for a few reasons, first, because nothing is worth it to me...not even the ‘does this dress make me look fat’ type of question and certainly not winning an arguement. Second, because at my age I could care less what people think enough to be diplomatic. Third, all my life, I have always believed in correcting my mistakes, admitting being wrong when I am because It has to potential of preventing propagation of a falsehood that could multiply by others falling prey to inaccuracies and also, I prefer to live the example I expect from others.
Just because you claim to be on the side of gun rights doesn’t buy you a pass; a gun control advocate or gun rights advocate, nobody gets a pass for dishonesty in my mind. The more you persist in propagating dishonesty, expect continued exposure. You could have put this to bed long ago and didn’t and your persistent assertions to having answered the questions you’ve been asked, continued avoiding a simple description of describing how a full auto sear controls ROF, and now asserting I have lied is filling in the hole you’ve dug over you. Any thing short of a demonstration you have knowledge of how full autos work and a simple description of describing how a full auto sear controls ROF is proof you have failed. And, saying you’ve already posted such is easily demonstrated by sharing the post numbers. The longer the game, the deeper the hole. Funny, it could have been a long bypassed point one way or the other, but you have allowed, by a vigorous persistent defense of your ignorance and unwillingness to simply admit you don’t know, this to become a question of your integrity. There is no shame in saying you don’t know something...I do it frequently thenbeducate myself...but there is in defending ignorance and trying to convince people of demonstrable false narratives based on ignorance.
Put up or concede.

 

I have.

 

No. Is there a valid reason for this restriction?

 

Another false statement and another shovel full.

 

Nothing I have said is false, and you know this.

 

Is there a valid reason for dry county/cities?

 

That's got nothing to do with this case.

 

Is SCOTUS taking it up? My bet is it won’t.

 

It's an identical comparison. If we can allow dry county/cities, we can have the same restrictions on FFL's.

 

They won't take this one. It is a zoning issue

 

Merely claiming something is wrong does not amount to actually refuting the point that was made.

 

Of course. And the reason is exactly the same