Gun Control is Completely Useless.

Murphy

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
No, that's just your perception of it. You are funny. Not bright, but funny. :lol:

The above wan't meant for you JLM. It was for Flossy.
 
Colpy

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Hoid said:
Did i get that wrong?

I thought the meme was alluding to the fact that students opinions on gun control amounted to "crying" - which is entirely in keeping with the NRA standard tactic of blaming and ridiculing survivors and their families.
Click to expand...

The criticism is not of the students crying and being stressed and wanting to do something......it is a criticism of those that want to ignore the supreme law of the land because the students are crying.

I tried to point this out to Corduroy, who accused me of "mocking them", which I would never do.

I failed to convince her.

Some strange variation of confirmation bias there.

You seem to be on the same page. Give your head a shake.
 
H

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
Colpy said:
The criticism is not of the students crying and being stressed and wanting to do something......it is a criticism of those that want to ignore the supreme law of the land because the students are crying.

I tried to point this out to Corduroy, who accused me of "mocking them", which I would never do.

I failed to convince her.

Some strange variation of confirmation bias there.

You seem to be on the same page. Give your head a shake.
Click to expand...
the students, far from crying, are demanding answers from elected officials.

looks like Trump is listening - and intends to start confiscating guns - just like Obama was always accused of wanting to do.

President Donald Trump hit a nerve with gun-rights enthusiasts this week after suggesting firearms should be confiscated from potentially dangerous people without a court’s approval,

http://time.com/5184160/trump-guns-due-process/
 
Tecumsehsbones

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
60,199
9,450
113
Washington DC
Colpy said:
The criticism is not of the students crying and being stressed and wanting to do something......it is a criticism of those that want to ignore the supreme law of the land because the students are crying.
Click to expand...

OK, now you're being borderline dishonest. Nobody but the extreme left fringe is talking about banning guns. At most, they are talking about banning a certain class of guns, which has already been found to be Constitutional in both Miller and Heller.

If you can't ban or restrict any gun at all, then what do you have to say about our ban on full-auto weapons manufactured or imported after 1986? Or our restrictions, and in some states flat out bans, on short-barreled rifles? Or the topic of Miller, sawn-off shotguns? Are those bans and restrictions unConstitutional?
 
J

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
Tecumsehsbones said:
OK, now you're being borderline dishonest. Nobody but the extreme left fringe is talking about banning guns. At most, they are talking about banning a certain class of guns, which has already been found to be Constitutional in both Miller and Heller.

If you can't ban or restrict any gun at all, then what do you have to say about our ban on full-auto weapons manufactured or imported after 1986? Or our restrictions, and in some states flat out bans, on short-barreled rifles? Or the topic of Miller, sawn-off shotguns? Are those bans and restrictions unConstitutional?
Click to expand...

I'm ok with implimenting principles of proportionality as described by the Oaks test. But do you realize that most specific bans wont hold up to the Oaks test. Most bans are tree chopping strategies to deal with a rotten apple.
You have to admit that some of crap coming out of the canadian courts is absolute bullshit. The co2 pellet handguns being defined as a special firearm,one that is dangerous yet doesn't require a PAL to purchase.
 
Colpy

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Tecumsehsbones said:
OK, now you're being borderline dishonest. Nobody but the extreme left fringe is talking about banning guns. At most, they are talking about banning a certain class of guns, which has already been found to be Constitutional in both Miller and Heller.

If you can't ban or restrict any gun at all, then what do you have to say about our ban on full-auto weapons manufactured or imported after 1986? Or our restrictions, and in some states flat out bans, on short-barreled rifles? Or the topic of Miller, sawn-off shotguns? Are those bans and restrictions unConstitutional?
Click to expand...

Unless I am wrong, the Miller decision allowed the ban on sawed-off shotguns because they were not a personal weapon suitable for a militia.

*The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizen the right to keep and bear such a weapon*.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

The AR 15, being the semi-auto version of the current personal weapon of the US armed forces, definitely is a weapon useful to the idea of a peoples' militia.

As for limits on weapons allowed to be held by the people, that is certainly where it gets complicated. The full auto ban, considering the lack of any problem prior to the ban, seems questionable at best. Then one has to consider why there was no problem, and the strict control on them certainly comes to bear. Really, once the state has a list of the people holding militia weapons, then the practical effect of them as a deterrent to tyranny is greatly diminished. I might point to the section of the Miller decision quoted above, as I think full auto weapons are are very limited use to a non-gov't militia, due to their excessive use of ammo. Yet that is an unsatisfactory answer, but I'm gonna side step the issue (because I don't know the answer) with the caveat that while I would be willing to throw full auto out of the sleigh, the AR 15 type rifle (and 30 round mags) are the minimum standard militia quality weapon, and are therefore clearly protected.

I think bans on short-barreled rifles are clearly unconstitutional.
 
H

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
The Ar15 could be banned with the stroke of the pen - or even without it.

As Trump said - take the guns first, then worry about due process.
 
pgs

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,515
8,122
113
B.C.
Hoid said:
The Ar15 could be banned with the stroke of the pen - or even without it.

As Trump said - take the guns first, then worry about due process.
Click to expand...
Take the guns ? Any compensation or just a wholesale gun grab ? Do we take Canadian’s guns as well , even those on a reservation ?
 
H

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
4
36
 
Colpy

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
Hoid said:
The Ar15 could be banned with the stroke of the pen - or even without it.

As Trump said - take the guns first, then worry about due process.
Click to expand...

Yep.

Ignore the Bill of Rights.

And "progressives" have the unmitigated gall to call us "fascists".
 
Murphy

Murphy

Executive Branch Member
Apr 12, 2013
8,181
0
36
Ontario
:laughing3: Silly Flossy. Trump has to operate within the law. :lol:

Do you think that your silliness will upset anyone here? You do not know the laws down south. First, research them, then post something cogent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom