Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[Quantum Windbag]

How can you claim it is ineffective? How can you know what the gun crime rate would be without any background checks?

I can claim it is ineffective because it did not stop Dorner.

Did Dorner kill everybody killed with a gun last year?

Did Dorner pass a background check?

Yes.

Did Dorner use guns he bought legally after passing a background check to kill people?

Yes.

This proves that background checks do not stop people who are going to kill others from buying guns.

By the way, it is absolutely impossible for almost anyone to legally buy a gun in the UK, and every legally owned weapon in that country is registered with the government so they can easily confiscate the weapons. In other words, they have exactly the system you claim will fix everything.

Yet, despite having your perfect system in place, gun crimes increased.

The Government's latest crime figures were condemned as "truly terrible" by the Tories today as it emerged that gun crime in England and Wales soared by 35% last year.
Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed.
Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362.
It was the fourth consecutive year to see a rise and there were more than 2,200 more gun crimes last year than the previous peak in 1993.
Figures showed the number of crimes involving handguns had more than doubled since the post-Dunblane massacre ban on the weapons, from 2,636 in 1997-1998 to 5,871.

Gun crime soars by 35% | Mail Online


That means that, once again, I do not have to prove something that you insist I have to prove in order to prove your ideas are dumber than letting a dog shit on your supper.


They simply do not work.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

Yet you don't seem to give a flying fuck about the same number of beautiful children being killed in places like DC, Chicago and LA every month.

Nope...Opportunist dickweeds like you are all about the big easily exploitable massacres, rather than the places where your fascistic gun control laws are towering failures.

This isn't just about massacres. America has a gun violence epidemic. Turd brains like you must believe we still live in the wagon train days. How hard is it to leave a municipality or state with strict gun laws to buy a gun in a state with lax ones? THAT is why we need federal legislation pea brain.

You have never uttered one word that would give anyone even the the impression that you care about anyone but yourself.

Is being a turd brain that believes we still live in wagon train days worse than being a person that ignores all the facts that prove them wrong?

 

[OKTexas]

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

It was horrible, but before those babies were even taken out of that school you left wing bastards were circling like buzzards to try to advance your gun grabbing agenda. Your pathetic human excrement of the worse order with absolutely no fucking shame. I sincerely hope that answers your question.

Weren't you one of those idiots making all those bogus claims about what happened?

Actually it would be the MSM that couldn't seem to get the story right. But I'm sure since they share your communist leanings you will be very happy to forgive their inability to verify information before they disseminated it. Your being the little boy that you are, will only blame the people that relied on their reporting. How's it feel to be the perfect little commie storm trooper? BTW you didn't get it right in your little rant either.

 

[Dubya]

It was horrible, but before those babies were even taken out of that school you left wing bastards were circling like buzzards to try to advance your gun grabbing agenda. Your pathetic human excrement of the worse order with absolutely no fucking shame. I sincerely hope that answers your question.

Weren't you one of those idiots making all those bogus claims about what happened?

Actually it would be the MSM that couldn't seem to get the story right. But I'm sure since they share your communist leanings you will be very happy to forgive their inability to verify information before they disseminated it. Your being the little boy that you are, will only blame the people that relied on their reporting. How's it feel to be the perfect little commie storm trooper? BTW you didn't get it right in your little rant either.

I warned you gun nuts not to take leaks seriously in an investigation and that every major crime has had misinformation given to the press. Now you are lying as if only the MSM reported what was leaked. The truth never shines around you people, does it?

Were you one of the clowns claiming the mother wasn't shot?

or

Were you one of the clowns asking why an assault weapons ban is needed, because no assault weapon was used.

or both?

 

[OKTexas]

Weren't you one of those idiots making all those bogus claims about what happened?

Actually it would be the MSM that couldn't seem to get the story right. But I'm sure since they share your communist leanings you will be very happy to forgive their inability to verify information before they disseminated it. Your being the little boy that you are, will only blame the people that relied on their reporting. How's it feel to be the perfect little commie storm trooper? BTW you didn't get it right in your little rant either.

I warned you gun nuts not to take leaks seriously in an investigation and that every major crime has had misinformation given to the press. Now you are lying as if only the MSM reported what was leaked. The truth never shines around you people, does it?

Were you one of the clowns claiming the mother wasn't shot?

or

Were you one of the clowns asking why an assault weapons ban is needed, because no assault weapon was used.

or both?

GMA reported that only 4 hand guns were used at one time, and as far as I know the mother was reported as being shot from day one. And since CT has a ban on assault weapons and the weapon used was state compliant, there was no assault weapon used. See how facts work, they are what they are neither you or I can change that.

 

[Dubya]

Actually it would be the MSM that couldn't seem to get the story right. But I'm sure since they share your communist leanings you will be very happy to forgive their inability to verify information before they disseminated it. Your being the little boy that you are, will only blame the people that relied on their reporting. How's it feel to be the perfect little commie storm trooper? BTW you didn't get it right in your little rant either.

I warned you gun nuts not to take leaks seriously in an investigation and that every major crime has had misinformation given to the press. Now you are lying as if only the MSM reported what was leaked. The truth never shines around you people, does it?

Were you one of the clowns claiming the mother wasn't shot?

or

Were you one of the clowns asking why an assault weapons ban is needed, because no assault weapon was used.

or both?

GMA reported that only 4 hand guns were used at one time, and as far as I know the mother was reported as being shot from day one. And since CT has a ban on assault weapons and the weapon used was state compliant, there was no assault weapon used. See how facts work, they are what they are neither you or I can change that.

Assault weapons bans usually involve dates and are bans on sales. The weapon used is an obvious assault weapon and there was no AR-15 left in the vehicle. It was a military style shotgun and may have even been like this one, hence the confusion:

 

[OKTexas]

I warned you gun nuts not to take leaks seriously in an investigation and that every major crime has had misinformation given to the press. Now you are lying as if only the MSM reported what was leaked. The truth never shines around you people, does it?

Were you one of the clowns claiming the mother wasn't shot?

or

Were you one of the clowns asking why an assault weapons ban is needed, because no assault weapon was used.

or both?

GMA reported that only 4 hand guns were used at one time, and as far as I know the mother was reported as being shot from day one. And since CT has a ban on assault weapons and the weapon used was state compliant, there was no assault weapon used. See how facts work, they are what they are neither you or I can change that.

Assault weapons bans usually involve dates and are bans on sales. The weapon used is an obvious assault weapon and there was no AR-15 left in the vehicle. It was a military style shotgun and may have even been like this one, hence the confusion:

There ya go again, you're not listening, CT has an assault weapons ban, and the gun used was a state compliant semi automatic rifle, not an assault weapon. It met all post ban criteria. Any questions?

 

[Dubya]

GMA reported that only 4 hand guns were used at one time, and as far as I know the mother was reported as being shot from day one. And since CT has a ban on assault weapons and the weapon used was state compliant, there was no assault weapon used. See how facts work, they are what they are neither you or I can change that.

Assault weapons bans usually involve dates and are bans on sales. The weapon used is an obvious assault weapon and there was no AR-15 left in the vehicle. It was a military style shotgun and may have even been like this one, hence the confusion:

There ya go again, you're not listening, CT has an assault weapons ban, and the gun used was a state compliant semi automatic rifle, not an assault weapon. It met all post ban criteria. Any questions?

I question why you didn't prove it.

Any selective-fire firearm capable of fully automatic, semiautomatic or burst fire at the option of the user or any of the following specified semiautomatic firearms: Algimec Agmi; Armalite AR-180; Australian Automatic Arms SAP Pistol; Auto-Ordnance Thompson type; Avtomat Kalashnikov AK-47 type; Barrett Light-Fifty model 82A1; Beretta AR-70; Bushmaster Auto Rifle and Auto Pistol; Calico models M-900, M-950 and 100-P; Chartered Industries of Singapore SR-88; Colt AR-15 and Sporter; Daewoo K-1, K-2, Max-1 and Max-2; Encom MK-IV, MP-9 and MP-45; Fabrique Nationale FN/FAL, FN/LAR, or FN/FNC; FAMAS MAS 223; Feather AT-9 and Mini-AT; Federal XC-900 and XC-450; Franchi SPAS-12 and LAW-12; Galil AR and ARM; Goncz High-Tech Carbine and High-Tech Long Pistol; Heckler & Koch HK-91, HK-93, HK-94 and SP-89; Holmes MP-83; MAC-10, MAC-11 Carbien type; Intratec TEC-9 and Scorpion; Iver Johnson Enforcer model 3000; Ruger Mini-14/5F folding stock model only; Scarab Skorpion; SIG 57 AMT and 500 Series; Spectre Auto Carbine and Auto Pistol; Springfield Armory BM59, SAR-48 and G-3; Sterling MK-6 and MK-7; Steyr AUG; Street Sweeper and Striker 12 revolving cylinder shotguns; USAS-12; USI Carbine, Mini-Carbine and Pistol; Weaver Arms Nighthawk; Wilkinson "Linda" Pistol.

Source: http://www.jud.ct.gov/ji/criminal/glossary/assaultweapon.htm

 

[OKTexas]

Assault weapons bans usually involve dates and are bans on sales. The weapon used is an obvious assault weapon and there was no AR-15 left in the vehicle. It was a military style shotgun and may have even been like this one, hence the confusion:

There ya go again, you're not listening, CT has an assault weapons ban, and the gun used was a state compliant semi automatic rifle, not an assault weapon. It met all post ban criteria. Any questions?

I question why you didn't prove it.

Sure I'll be happy to, just as soon as you prove the one in the photo you provided is exactly the same model, with the same accessories used in CT. No hurry, I'll wait. But it was reported the wapon was state compliant. Never mind here's a link: http://articles.courant.com/2012-12...20121217_1_assault-weapon-lethal-weapon-rifle

 

[Dubya]

There ya go again, you're not listening, CT has an assault weapons ban, and the gun used was a state compliant semi automatic rifle, not an assault weapon. It met all post ban criteria. Any questions?

I question why you didn't prove it.

Sure I'll be happy to, just as soon as you prove the one in the photo you provided is exactly the same model, with the same accessories used in CT. No hurry, I'll wait. But it was reported the wapon was state compliant. Never mind here's a link: Newtown shootings: In Connecticut, the Bushmaster rifle used by Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School is legal. - Hartford Courant

What has been proven is removing a weapon from a vehicle causes rumors to get to the media who report the rumors. From a distance a person may not be able to tell if that is an AR-15, so that's what gets reported and passed around, until the police report. Then you have all these clowns who always think there is some kind of conspiracy involved, because the story has changed or people like you just making up bullshit. The story is actually always the same and "it was reported" gets changed to "it was a fact" in people's minds.

Connecticut banned the AR-15, but had such a weak assault weapons laws that variants weren't considered in the law. Bushmaster was also involved in the DC Sniper Shootings and is just a company making a variant to bypass the law. Connecticut has what's considered a partial assault weapons ban which spells out certain weapons, but asshole corporations adapt to get around the intent of the law. It's just like making a designer drug and little wonder Bushmaster was sold by Cerberus Capital Management, because they don't want another lawsuit like what happened with the DC Sniper Shootings.

The way I look at it is like this and I have discussed it with the guy from New York, Martybegan, or whatever the hell his name is. I don't want an assault weapons ban, but since there are so many gun nuts who can't even read the Constitution and are making threats, I'll now support an assault weapons ban just to spite them. You people behave like assholes and think the public will support you? Well, it doesn't work that way with people. I can see the people wanting gun control may be going too far in some cases, but they aren't legally going too far. I think we could have had a system that allows someone to have an assault weapon and have fun shooting it, but it's obvious you gun nuts will not cooperate, so fuck you, lose it all! Let's see if you are man enough to defy the law like you claim you will! If some of you have to die in the process, that's just too bad. You had your chance and you blew it.

Tell it to the Judge!

 

[OKTexas]

I question why you didn't prove it.

Sure I'll be happy to, just as soon as you prove the one in the photo you provided is exactly the same model, with the same accessories used in CT. No hurry, I'll wait. But it was reported the wapon was state compliant. Never mind here's a link: Newtown shootings: In Connecticut, the Bushmaster rifle used by Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School is legal. - Hartford Courant

What has been proven is removing a weapon from a vehicle causes rumors to get to the media who report the rumors. From a distance a person may not be able to tell if that is an AR-15, so that's what gets reported and passed around, until the police report. Then you have all these clowns who always think there is some kind of conspiracy involved, because the story has changed or people like you just making up bullshit. The story is actually always the same and "it was reported" gets changed to "it was a fact" in people's minds.

Connecticut banned the AR-15, but had such a weak assault weapons laws that variants weren't considered in the law. Bushmaster was also involved in the DC Sniper Shootings and is just a company making a variant to bypass the law. Connecticut has what's considered a partial assault weapons ban which spells out certain weapons, but asshole corporations adapt to get around the intent of the law. It's just like making a designer drug and little wonder Bushmaster was sold by Cerberus Capital Management, because they don't want another lawsuit like what happened with the DC Sniper Shootings.

The way I look at it is like this and I have discussed it with the guy from New York, Martybegan, or whatever the hell his name is. I don't want an assault weapons ban, but since there are so many gun nuts who can't even read the Constitution and are making threats, I'll now support an assault weapons ban just to spite them. You people behave like assholes and think the public will support you? Well, it doesn't work that way with people. I can see the people wanting gun control may be going too far in some cases, but they aren't legally going too far. I think we could have had a system that allows someone to have an assault weapon and have fun shooting it, but it's obvious you gun nuts will not cooperate, so fuck you, lose it all! Let's see if you are man enough to defy the law like you claim you will! If some of you have to die in the process, that's just too bad. You had your chance and you blew it.

Tell it to the Judge!

Just can't admit that the rifle used was not considered an assault weapon under CT law, can ya? You can't push technicalities and not accept them when presented to you. That would make you a hypocrite, wouldn't it? Time for bed.

 

[Dubya]

Sure I'll be happy to, just as soon as you prove the one in the photo you provided is exactly the same model, with the same accessories used in CT. No hurry, I'll wait. But it was reported the wapon was state compliant. Never mind here's a link: Newtown shootings: In Connecticut, the Bushmaster rifle used by Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School is legal. - Hartford Courant

What has been proven is removing a weapon from a vehicle causes rumors to get to the media who report the rumors. From a distance a person may not be able to tell if that is an AR-15, so that's what gets reported and passed around, until the police report. Then you have all these clowns who always think there is some kind of conspiracy involved, because the story has changed or people like you just making up bullshit. The story is actually always the same and "it was reported" gets changed to "it was a fact" in people's minds.

Connecticut banned the AR-15, but had such a weak assault weapons laws that variants weren't considered in the law. Bushmaster was also involved in the DC Sniper Shootings and is just a company making a variant to bypass the law. Connecticut has what's considered a partial assault weapons ban which spells out certain weapons, but asshole corporations adapt to get around the intent of the law. It's just like making a designer drug and little wonder Bushmaster was sold by Cerberus Capital Management, because they don't want another lawsuit like what happened with the DC Sniper Shootings.

The way I look at it is like this and I have discussed it with the guy from New York, Martybegan, or whatever the hell his name is. I don't want an assault weapons ban, but since there are so many gun nuts who can't even read the Constitution and are making threats, I'll now support an assault weapons ban just to spite them. You people behave like assholes and think the public will support you? Well, it doesn't work that way with people. I can see the people wanting gun control may be going too far in some cases, but they aren't legally going too far. I think we could have had a system that allows someone to have an assault weapon and have fun shooting it, but it's obvious you gun nuts will not cooperate, so fuck you, lose it all! Let's see if you are man enough to defy the law like you claim you will! If some of you have to die in the process, that's just too bad. You had your chance and you blew it.

Tell it to the Judge!

Just can't admit that the rifle used was not considered an assault weapon under CT law, can ya? You can't push technicalities and not accept them when presented to you. That would make you a hypocrite, wouldn't it? Time for bed.

I said it was an assault weapon and never mentioned their law. You brought that up. I never said it was banned. You brought that up.

Figure it out, clown and .....

Tell it to the Judge!

Keep your shit up and we'll put you back in the single shot days!

 

[The Rabbi]

I can claim it is ineffective because it did not stop Dorner.

Did Dorner kill everybody killed with a gun last year?

Did Dorner pass a background check?

Yes.

Did Dorner use guns he bought legally after passing a background check to kill people?

Yes.

This proves that background checks do not stop people who are going to kill others from buying guns.

By the way, it is absolutely impossible for almost anyone to legally buy a gun in the UK, and every legally owned weapon in that country is registered with the government so they can easily confiscate the weapons. In other words, they have exactly the system you claim will fix everything.

Yet, despite having your perfect system in place, gun crimes increased.

The Government's latest crime figures were condemned as "truly terrible" by the Tories today as it emerged that gun crime in England and Wales soared by 35% last year.
Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed.
Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362.
It was the fourth consecutive year to see a rise and there were more than 2,200 more gun crimes last year than the previous peak in 1993.
Figures showed the number of crimes involving handguns had more than doubled since the post-Dunblane massacre ban on the weapons, from 2,636 in 1997-1998 to 5,871.

Gun crime soars by 35% | Mail Online


That means that, once again, I do not have to prove something that you insist I have to prove in order to prove your ideas are dumber than letting a dog shit on your supper.


They simply do not work.

And I predict that is the last response Dumya will give to that thread, an objection he raised himself.
Yes, gun laws don't work. We have a 100 year history of them not working. And as in real life, Dumya's suggestions for improvement go ever more towards restriction and control. First background checks. When pointed out those wont work,, then gun registration. When that won't work, keeping them locked up. When that wont work, keeping them disassembled. When that won't work, confiscating them. When that won't work outlawing knives. When that wont work constant video surveillance inside everyone's home by the gov't. Hello, Big Brother.
He is a big gov dunce of epic proportions and a total fail so bad he's turned off his rep.

 

[Gadawg73]

• Without a gun registration process, there is no way to know who sold what weapon to whom.
  
  
• Without mandatory background checks, private gun sellers can always claim ignorance of the fact that a person is a felon.
  
  
• And Republicans have effectively hamstrung enforcement of existing gun laws.

If we could track where the criminal were getting their guns, and actually hold them responsible, then said illegal gun sales would decrease exponentially, as private gun sellers would actually pay attention to who they were selling their guns to, or face jail time.

I continuously hear people talking about how gun control would be ineffective because criminals will get weapons anyway...

And they're right. I agree that stopping the sale of guns is not the answer.

But where do you think the criminals are getting them from?

How do background checks of law abiding people impede thieves and black marketers?

It should be simple to understand. But that is a reach for you Jethro.

As citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley. But we CAN stop criminals from buying weapons in the light of day in the safe, secure setting of a public gun show.

In some dark alley IS WHERE a criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

In your dreams you can.
But you can not catch the criminals.
They use fake identification.
WTF is a "totally legal setting"?
Where is that utopia?
Do they have free beer and pussy?

 

[Gadawg73]

The AR 15 used up there WAS NOT an assault weapon, it was a semi automatic weapon.

DUMB ASSES

 

[Dubya]

Did Dorner kill everybody killed with a gun last year?

Did Dorner pass a background check?

Yes.

Did Dorner use guns he bought legally after passing a background check to kill people?

Yes.

This proves that background checks do not stop people who are going to kill others from buying guns.

By the way, it is absolutely impossible for almost anyone to legally buy a gun in the UK, and every legally owned weapon in that country is registered with the government so they can easily confiscate the weapons. In other words, they have exactly the system you claim will fix everything.

Yet, despite having your perfect system in place, gun crimes increased.

The Government's latest crime figures were condemned as "truly terrible" by the Tories today as it emerged that gun crime in England and Wales soared by 35% last year.
Criminals used handguns in 46% more offences, Home Office statistics revealed.
Firearms were used in 9,974 recorded crimes in the 12 months to last April, up from 7,362.
It was the fourth consecutive year to see a rise and there were more than 2,200 more gun crimes last year than the previous peak in 1993.
Figures showed the number of crimes involving handguns had more than doubled since the post-Dunblane massacre ban on the weapons, from 2,636 in 1997-1998 to 5,871.

Gun crime soars by 35% | Mail Online


That means that, once again, I do not have to prove something that you insist I have to prove in order to prove your ideas are dumber than letting a dog shit on your supper.


They simply do not work.

And I predict that is the last response Dumya will give to that thread, an objection he raised himself.
Yes, gun laws don't work. We have a 100 year history of them not working. And as in real life, Dumya's suggestions for improvement go ever more towards restriction and control. First background checks. When pointed out those wont work,, then gun registration. When that won't work, keeping them locked up. When that wont work, keeping them disassembled. When that won't work, confiscating them. When that won't work outlawing knives. When that wont work constant video surveillance inside everyone's home by the gov't. Hello, Big Brother.
He is a big gov dunce of epic proportions and a total fail so bad he's turned off his rep.

What was there like 35 to 50 homicides by gun that year in the UK and 11,000 here?

 

[Bfgrn]

Jefferson tree of liberty is my favorite of Jefferson's quote, why don't you use it

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

Those children are what you think of every single time you try to argue about the 2nd Amendment. Is that because your intellectual capacity won't let you admit you are wrong about everything?

Have you thought about the fact that Jefferson actually thought people should conduct an armed rebellion once every few years was a good idea, or do you only like the quotes that are easy for you to misinterpret?

Where do you come up with 'Jefferson actually thought people should conduct an armed rebellion once every few years was a good idea'? You are a total moron with a brain smaller than a pea. And are you saying what happened to those children was 'a good idea'?

SCUM...

 

[Dubya]

The AR 15 used up there WAS NOT an assault weapon, it was a semi automatic weapon.

DUMB ASSES

All AR-15 are semi automatic weapons. The fact is Bushmaster made variants of the AR-15 which was banned in Connecticut. The Colt AR-15 is banned and it looked like the M-16, when I bought one, not long after I turned in my M-16. The Bushmaster even looks more like an assault weapon, but Connecticut fucked up and listed weapons instead of describing what an assault weapon was. Because of that mistake, the Connecticut assault weapons ban is considered a partial ban.

Now the gun nuts have played their games and it's the states chance to get even. Blame yourselves! Keep it up and Congress will be next!

 

[Dubya]

How do background checks of law abiding people impede thieves and black marketers?

It should be simple to understand. But that is a reach for you Jethro.

As citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley. But we CAN stop criminals from buying weapons in the light of day in the safe, secure setting of a public gun show.

In some dark alley IS WHERE a criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

In your dreams you can.
But you can not catch the criminals.
They use fake identification.
WTF is a "totally legal setting"?
Where is that utopia?
Do they have free beer and pussy?

A clown like you deserves a pea shooter without the friggin' peas!

 

[OriginalShroom]

Is that what you right wing scum thought of when you heard about the brutal murder of those twenty 6 and 7 year old beautiful children?

Yet you don't seem to give a flying fuck about the same number of beautiful children being killed in places like DC, Chicago and LA every month.

Nope...Opportunist dickweeds like you are all about the big easily exploitable massacres, rather than the places where your fascistic gun control laws are towering failures.

This isn't just about massacres. America has a gun violence epidemic. Turd brains like you must believe we still live in the wagon train days. How hard is it to leave a municipality or state with strict gun laws to buy a gun in a state with lax ones? THAT is why we need federal legislation pea brain.
You have never uttered one word that would give anyone even the the impression that you care about anyone but yourself.

Have you ever heard of the 10th Amendment?

" The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. "