Do You Support The "Gun Show Loophole?"

[rightwinger]

You have the right to own firearms protected by the second amendment.
Miller vs U.S.

Hell yea!

And if I want to shoot up a packed movie theater or classroom full of first graders I better have the weapon of my choice

Where is my Bushmaster baby?

Fine that crime would be on you not me or any other owner of said weapon. Take your punishment and leave me and others the hell alone.

Fuck yea!

Now we are talking

Let me get any weapon I choose.......shooting first graders by the dozen is not easy

 

[rightwinger]

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Hell yea!

And if I want to shoot up a packed movie theater or classroom full of first graders I better have the weapon of my choice

Where is my Bushmaster baby?

Fine that crime would be on you not me or any other owner of said weapon. Take your punishment and leave me and others the hell alone.

Fuck yea!

Now we are talking

Let me get any weapon I choose.......shooting first graders by the dozen is not easy

You're supposed to be an adult, you do the crime you do the time, stop dragging the rest of us into what is your fault.

 

[The Rabbi]

Hell yea!

And if I want to shoot up a packed movie theater or classroom full of first graders I better have the weapon of my choice

Where is my Bushmaster baby?

Fine that crime would be on you not me or any other owner of said weapon. Take your punishment and leave me and others the hell alone.

Fuck yea!

Now we are talking

Let me get any weapon I choose.......shooting first graders by the dozen is not easy

Especially when you have your head up your ass. Which you obviously do.

 

[Dubya]

You have the right to not have the populace disarmed and that doesn't give you the right to own weapons considered too dangerous for society to have.

{Article [II.]

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. }

Try again, sparky.

I have to quote that before you edit it.

You people really know your Constitution <sarc>!

 

[Uncensored2008]

I have to quote that before you edit it.

You people really know your Constitution <sarc>!

If you quoted the Constitution, wouldn't you burst into flames?

 

[Uncensored2008]

 

[Dubya]

You have the right to not have the populace disarmed and that doesn't give you the right to own weapons considered too dangerous for society to have.

You have the right to own firearms protected by the second amendment.
Miller vs U.S.

Hell yea!

And if I want to shoot up a packed movie theater or classroom full of first graders I better have the weapon of my choice

Where is my Bushmaster baby?

It's only logical bigasshole1775 would reverse United States v. Miller and claim a false victory.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You have the right to own firearms protected by the second amendment.
Miller vs U.S.

Hell yea!

And if I want to shoot up a packed movie theater or classroom full of first graders I better have the weapon of my choice

Where is my Bushmaster baby?

It's only logical bigasshole1775 would reverse United States v. Miller and claim a false victory.

Take me off ignore you lying sack of shit.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Background checks for all gun sales, requiring gun dealers to maintain an inventory, and maitaining a database of gun sales don't have any Constitutional ramifications. Period.

So let it be written
So let it be done

 

[Dubya]

I have to quote that before you edit it.

You people really know your Constitution <sarc>!

If you quoted the Constitution, wouldn't you burst into flames?

You fucking idiots are truly delusional.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
Thus, for the keeping and bearing of a firearm to be constitutionally protected, the firearm should be a militia-type arm.

United States v. Miller - 307 U.S. 174 (1939) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center

 

[nodoginnafight]

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
Thus, for the keeping and bearing of a firearm to be constitutionally protected, the firearm should be a militia-type arm.

United States v. Miller - 307 U.S. 174 (1939) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center

Either that or you have to join the National Guard to get a gun ......

 

[M14 Shooter]

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
Thus, for the keeping and bearing of a firearm to be constitutionally protected, the firearm should be a militia-type arm.

United States v. Miller - 307 U.S. 174 (1939) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.

And so, if there WAS evidence that that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" --- or any other firearm --- at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, they WOULD say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument, as it WOULD be within judicial notice that these weapons are any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

Doesn't get much more clear than that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
Thus, for the keeping and bearing of a firearm to be constitutionally protected, the firearm should be a militia-type arm.

United States v. Miller - 307 U.S. 174 (1939) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center

Either that or you have to join the National Guard to get a gun ......

The national guard is not the militia

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Plus if you didn't notice the ruling also said

"all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense" and that "when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."
Notice that? in the guard you don't own the firearm you carry.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Background checks for all gun sales, requiring gun dealers to maintain an inventory, and maitaining a database of gun sales don't have any Constitutional ramifications. Period.

So let it be written
So let it be done

Fuck off, thug.

What you scumbags have proposed so far;



Possession of hollow point bullets and similar assault bullets a felony.
Must register and report ammo purchases. Only purchase max 500 rounds.
10 round magazine limit
ALL magazines must be fixed to the gun (can not be removed without the use of a tool)
100% prohibition of all magazines greater than 10 rounds. All previous grandfathered magazines become illegal. Felony if you keep one.
Changing definition of shotgun revolving cylinder — Basically only single shot shotguns will remain legal.
Bullet Buttons will become illegal — All AR and AK style rifles that are currently equipped with them will be designated Assault Weapons. Felony to possess.
All gun owners now must be licensed like drivers.
All gun owners must carry gun liability insurance

List of Proposed California Gun Control Measures -- 500 Round Max, No Grandfathering, No Detachable Mags, Mandatory License | The Truth About Guns

I do say fuck you.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You fucking idiots are truly delusional.

Given your hatred of the document and the work you put into dismantling it...

 

[M14 Shooter]

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
Thus, for the keeping and bearing of a firearm to be constitutionally protected, the firearm should be a militia-type arm.

United States v. Miller - 307 U.S. 174 (1939) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center

Either that or you have to join the National Guard to get a gun ......

The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Background checks for all gun sales, requiring gun dealers to maintain an inventory, and maitaining a database of gun sales don't have any Constitutional ramifications. Period.

So let it be written
So let it be done

Fuck off, thug.

What you scumbags have proposed so far;



Possession of hollow point bullets and similar assault bullets a felony.
Must register and report ammo purchases. Only purchase max 500 rounds.
10 round magazine limit
ALL magazines must be fixed to the gun (can not be removed without the use of a tool)
100% prohibition of all magazines greater than 10 rounds. All previous grandfathered magazines become illegal. Felony if you keep one.
Changing definition of shotgun revolving cylinder — Basically only single shot shotguns will remain legal.
Bullet Buttons will become illegal — All AR and AK style rifles that are currently equipped with them will be designated Assault Weapons. Felony to possess.
All gun owners now must be licensed like drivers.
All gun owners must carry gun liability insurance

List of Proposed California Gun Control Measures -- 500 Round Max, No Grandfathering, No Detachable Mags, Mandatory License | The Truth About Guns

I do say fuck you.

you mad bro?

I told you what I advocate

so clean out your diaper

 

[Dubya]

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
Thus, for the keeping and bearing of a firearm to be constitutionally protected, the firearm should be a militia-type arm.

United States v. Miller - 307 U.S. 174 (1939) :: Justia US Supreme Court Center

In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument.

And so, if there WAS evidence that that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" --- or any other firearm --- at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, they WOULD say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument, as it WOULD be within judicial notice that these weapons are any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.

Doesn't get much more clear than that.

The atomic bomb made the day of militia obsolete. Militia was only mentioned in the 2nd to encourage the states to have them. It didn't involve a requirement.