Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
muskets dont compare to assault rifles, but assault rifles dont compare to drones and lasers.
The group, "Take American Back," is planning an armed and peaceful rally on July 4, 2013
in Washington, D.C. Washington DC has some the strictest gun laws in America.
Will this be the first battle of the 2nd Civil War?
The Resistance Report: "Armed" Rally planned for July 4, 2013
More proof that the anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or disnonesty.Will they be carrying muskets - like when the 2nd Amendment was ratified?
Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 3536 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.
Democide, we are gonna die from democide.
More proof that the anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.Not really in the mood for these nuts that want more Americans killed.
The decent caring humans in this country will drop you nutters and your fear in a red hot second.
your little guns dont scare real Americans
My freedom of speech is not an absolute freedom. It is restricted to make slander and libel and unfounded calls of danger such as crying "FIRE!" in a theater a crime. The freedom of the press is also not an absolute, again making crimes of slander. My freedom of religion is also not an absolute as any Voodoo worshipers cannot sacrifice animals.
I wonder why the gun lovers believe that their right to own any and all firearms should not be restricted in order to maintain public health and safety? If the founders knew of any technology beyond musketry, would they turn a blind eye to the obvious public safety concerns once weapons designed for the military are held by the public? If the 2nd amendment was written today, wouldn't it make sense to clearly define what "arms" are?
What are you complaining about? In your opening two sentences, you seem to think that the president is overstepping his authority. But you wind up worried that there has not been enough authority projected to complete prosecutions.My freedom of speech is not an absolute freedom. It is restricted to make slander and libel and unfounded calls of danger such as crying "FIRE!" in a theater a crime. The freedom of the press is also not an absolute, again making crimes of slander. My freedom of religion is also not an absolute as any Voodoo worshipers cannot sacrifice animals.
I wonder why the gun lovers believe that their right to own any and all firearms should not be restricted in order to maintain public health and safety? If the founders knew of any technology beyond musketry, would they turn a blind eye to the obvious public safety concerns once weapons designed for the military are held by the public? If the 2nd amendment was written today, wouldn't it make sense to clearly define what "arms" are?
The President's power isn't absolute either. I wonder why he thinks there should be no limits on his executive actions. There are already restrictions on gun ownership to maintain public safety. Background checks have caught tens of thousands of people and stopped them from purchasing firearms. Only a handful of them stopped have ever been prosecuted.
The group, "Take American Back," is planning an armed and peaceful rally on July 4, 2013
in Washington, D.C. Washington DC has some the strictest gun laws in America.
Will this be the first battle of the 2nd Civil War?
The Resistance Report: "Armed" Rally planned for July 4, 2013
No, it would NOT be justifiable. But a law enforcement officer should make them aware of the elevated danger they present by carrying their weapons in public. Fear, panic, trepidation are the tactics of those who have no concern for the public at large, but for themselves alone.We have had a couple of nutters walk the streets with unloaded Bushmasters, to make the point concerning open carry. However, should one of them do that near a school, and someone homeowner pull out his hunting rifle, and take the nutters head off, it would be fully justifiable homicide.
Thank you for proving yet again that the anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and'or dishonesty.We have had a couple of nutters walk the streets with unloaded Bushmasters, to make the point concerning open carry. However, should one of them do that near a school, and someone homeowner pull out his hunting rifle, and take the nutters head off, it would be fully justifiable homicide.
