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.
What you mean to say is the level of misuse of guns by gun owners in the US in no way justifies the wholesale licensure of gun owners, wholesale registration of firearms, punitive taxation of the ownership of firearms and the cessation of the production of new firearms.There are 1 million AR-15s in private hands, yet they account for a handful of crimes each year....why...because our criminals prefer small concealable guns....but if they want AR-15s or anything else for that matter you tax stamp isn't going to stop them........The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.Again, we already have the tax stamp process for machine guns...
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.Not as many...
What you mean to say is the level of misuse of guns by gun owners in the US in no way justifies the wholesale licensure of gun owners, wholesale registration of firearms, punitive taxation of the ownership of firearms and the cessation of the production of new firearms.There are 1 million AR-15s in private hands, yet they account for a handful of crimes each year....why...because our criminals prefer small concealable guns....but if they want AR-15s or anything else for that matter you tax stamp isn't going to stop them........The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.
Indeed. All these are, without question, intentionally broad infringements on the right to arms for which there is no demonstrable compelling state interest.
No I was going to say there must not be very many defenses because most where a shot was fired would make the news. And very few make the news.
And again...they only publish things they think are interesting, strained through a filter of anti gun bias......that, with the fact that most news casts are only 20 minutes long with commericials.....only the most interesting stories are going to make it and victim pulls gun and criminal runs away.....not going to make the news in most cases...unless it is on video...
Gun defenses are interesting, thats why they make national news. In this day of the Internet there would be lots of defense stories if shots were fired 46% of the time.
1) not if there wasn't a death
2) only if they have video
Many have neither and make the news. Guns are big news. Look how many accidental shootings make the news even with no deaths.
there were a total of 505 accidental gun deaths in 2013....care to show me links to all of those stories?
As I have "repeatedly" explained to you congress is allowed to tax the HELL out of us an screw with us as much as they want too. Look at Obama care. Look at the current tax stamp process for machine guns. They have their nazi boots and they are allowed to use them. The tax stamp process is not a BAN it's a regulatory process that is "constitutional."All of which are intended to make the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms too expensive to exercise.The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.Again, we already have the tax stamp process for machine guns...
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.Not as many...
This infringes upon the right to keeps and bear arms as it would if enacted over the exercise of any right.
So does any ban on the sales of new guns.
Fail.
Criminals will also, as you admit, still get guns. Fail.
I didn't say they could take it away. What I said is they can use the tax stamp process and other taxes to make it too expensive for most people to buy them.Incorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail. Government is allowed to tax you to hell and back for any damn reason they want to. Well except to vote that is.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.Again, we already have the tax stamp process for machine guns...Shall not infringe.Again as stated before.. your reading of the 2nd amendment is wrong. It says "shall not restrict" it does not say shall make no laws regarding, shall not regulate, shall not limit, shall not register, or shall not tax.
Any restriction or precondition laid upon the exercise of the right to arms not inherent to same is an infringement.
None of the restrictions you want to lay upon that exercise of the right are inherent to same - thus, infringements.
Criminals will still get guns, yes?Incorrect I already explained how it prevents some criminals from getting guns. It does so by reducing the number of guns in non-criminals hands. By reducing the number of guns in non-criminal hands we reduce future first criminals that use otherwise legal guns tocommit crime.
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.Not as many...
And so with the vote so with having a gun....it is a right, just like voting, thanks for proving our point for us....
Since when did our Federal Government need justification for screwing us? We're talking about a government that thinks its funny and ok to delete public records when they get caught screwing us over the coals. This government makes Nixon look like a saint. We're talking about a government that uses tax payer dollars to arm drug cartels with machine guns. We're talking about a government that uses drones to kill US citizens.What you mean to say is the level of misuse of guns by gun owners in the US in no way justifies the wholesale licensure of gun owners, wholesale registration of firearms, punitive taxation of the ownership of firearms and the cessation of the production of new firearms.There are 1 million AR-15s in private hands, yet they account for a handful of crimes each year....why...because our criminals prefer small concealable guns....but if they want AR-15s or anything else for that matter you tax stamp isn't going to stop them........The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.
Indeed. All these are, without question, intentionally broad infringements on the right to arms for which there is no demonstrable compelling state interest.
But not under the effort of trying to limit the exercise of a fundamental right specifically protected by the constitution, because those protections, found in various amendments, amend the power to tax.As I have "repeatedly" explained to you congress is allowed to tax the HELL out of us...All of which are intended to make the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms too expensive to exercise.The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.
This infringes upon the right to keeps and bear arms as it would if enacted over the exercise of any right.
So does any ban on the sales of new guns.
Fail.
Criminals will also, as you admit, still get guns. Fail.
This is of course, a lie, with no substance whatsoever behind it.Nothing short of completely stopping you from exercising your rights will be considered "infringing" by congress, the POTUS, and the SCOTUS.
Since Marbury v Madison and footnote 4 of Carolene Products.Since when did our Federal Government need justification for screwing us?What you mean to say is the level of misuse of guns by gun owners in the US in no way justifies the wholesale licensure of gun owners, wholesale registration of firearms, punitive taxation of the ownership of firearms and the cessation of the production of new firearms.There are 1 million AR-15s in private hands, yet they account for a handful of crimes each year....why...because our criminals prefer small concealable guns....but if they want AR-15s or anything else for that matter you tax stamp isn't going to stop them........The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.
Indeed. All these are, without question, intentionally broad infringements on the right to arms for which there is no demonstrable compelling state interest.
And you want to make it that much harder for the people to protect themselves from that government.We're talking about a government that thinks its funny and ok to delete public records when they get caught screwing us over the coals. This government makes Nixon look like a saint. We're talking about a government that uses tax payer dollars to arm drug cartels with machine guns. We're talking about a government that uses drones to kill US citizens.
My answer begins with the fact that I am strongly opposed to gun registration. But since gun registration exists and is firmly embedded in our established system of government I don't see how my suggestion, which will prevent a lot of death and injury, can add to the negativity of registration.I ask again::
How does the tiny % of guns and gun owners that misuse their firearms create a compelling state interest where it must have on record the identity and whereabouts of everyone that chooses to exercise their right to arms in order to protect the rights of the people?[...]
Since when did our Federal Government need justification for screwing us? We're talking about a government that thinks its funny and ok to delete public records when they get caught screwing us over the coals. This government makes Nixon look like a saint. We're talking about a government that uses tax payer dollars to arm drug cartels with machine guns. We're talking about a government that uses drones to kill US citizens.What you mean to say is the level of misuse of guns by gun owners in the US in no way justifies the wholesale licensure of gun owners, wholesale registration of firearms, punitive taxation of the ownership of firearms and the cessation of the production of new firearms.There are 1 million AR-15s in private hands, yet they account for a handful of crimes each year....why...because our criminals prefer small concealable guns....but if they want AR-15s or anything else for that matter you tax stamp isn't going to stop them........The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.
Indeed. All these are, without question, intentionally broad infringements on the right to arms for which there is no demonstrable compelling state interest.
I didn't say they could take it away. What I said is they can use the tax stamp process and other taxes to make it too expensive for most people to buy them.Incorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail. Government is allowed to tax you to hell and back for any damn reason they want to. Well except to vote that is.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.Again, we already have the tax stamp process for machine guns...Shall not infringe.
Any restriction or precondition laid upon the exercise of the right to arms not inherent to same is an infringement.
None of the restrictions you want to lay upon that exercise of the right are inherent to same - thus, infringements.
Criminals will still get guns, yes?
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.Not as many...
And so with the vote so with having a gun....it is a right, just like voting, thanks for proving our point for us....
As I have "repeatedly" explained to you congress is allowed to tax the HELL out of us an screw with us as much as they want too. Look at Obama care. Look at the current tax stamp process for machine guns. They have their nazi boots and they are allowed to use them. The tax stamp process is not a BAN it's a regulatory process that is "constitutional."All of which are intended to make the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms too expensive to exercise.The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.
This infringes upon the right to keeps and bear arms as it would if enacted over the exercise of any right.
So does any ban on the sales of new guns.
Fail.
Criminals will also, as you admit, still get guns. Fail.
The only FAIL is your ability to recognize that the FAIL is your ASSUMPTION that this Federal Government can't fuck you over at will. Excuse my french.
Nothing short of completely stopping you from exercising your rights will be considered "infringing" by congress, the POTUS, and the SCOTUS. You are SCREWED. If you don't like being SCREWED you will have to elect better representatives than those from this two headed snake we call the democrat-republican party.
And again...they only publish things they think are interesting, strained through a filter of anti gun bias......that, with the fact that most news casts are only 20 minutes long with commericials.....only the most interesting stories are going to make it and victim pulls gun and criminal runs away.....not going to make the news in most cases...unless it is on video...
Gun defenses are interesting, thats why they make national news. In this day of the Internet there would be lots of defense stories if shots were fired 46% of the time.
1) not if there wasn't a death
2) only if they have video
Many have neither and make the news. Guns are big news. Look how many accidental shootings make the news even with no deaths.
there were a total of 505 accidental gun deaths in 2013....care to show me links to all of those stories?
i bet they can be found. But no im not going to go back and find them. You want me to start posting accidental shootings? It's amazing how more of those make the news than defenses.
My answer begins with the fact that I am strongly opposed to gun registration. But since gun registration exists and is firmly embedded in our established system of government I don't see how my suggestion, which will prevent a lot of death and injury, can add to the negativity of registration.I ask again::
How does the tiny % of guns and gun owners that misuse their firearms create a compelling state interest where it must have on record the identity and whereabouts of everyone that chooses to exercise their right to arms in order to protect the rights of the people?[...]
If your opposition to my suggestion is based on an anti-registration position, am I mistaken in believing that gun registration is a nationwide requirement for legal ownership? I presently own two guns. As I recall, I had to go through a major bureaucratic process to register both purchases. So how would my suggestion add to the registration requirements?
Not any more they can now tax you for your right to health care. They can tax you for ANY EFFING REASON WHATSOEVER NOW.But not under the effort of trying to limit the exercise of a fundamental right specifically protected by the constitution, because those protections, found in various amendments, amend the power to tax.As I have "repeatedly" explained to you congress is allowed to tax the HELL out of us...All of which are intended to make the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms too expensive to exercise.The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.
This infringes upon the right to keeps and bear arms as it would if enacted over the exercise of any right.
So does any ban on the sales of new guns.
Fail.
Criminals will also, as you admit, still get guns. Fail.
You refuse to understand this. Not sure why.
This is of course, a lie, with no substance whatsoever behind it.Nothing short of completely stopping you from exercising your rights will be considered "infringing" by congress, the POTUS, and the SCOTUS.
Me? I'm on the side of liberty. But I'm not blind to the facts.Since Marbury v Madison and footnote 4 of Carolene Products.Since when did our Federal Government need justification for screwing us?What you mean to say is the level of misuse of guns by gun owners in the US in no way justifies the wholesale licensure of gun owners, wholesale registration of firearms, punitive taxation of the ownership of firearms and the cessation of the production of new firearms.There are 1 million AR-15s in private hands, yet they account for a handful of crimes each year....why...because our criminals prefer small concealable guns....but if they want AR-15s or anything else for that matter you tax stamp isn't going to stop them........The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms
Indeed. All these are, without question, intentionally broad infringements on the right to arms for which there is no demonstrable compelling state interest.
And you want to make it that much harder for the people to protect themselves from that government.We're talking about a government that thinks its funny and ok to delete public records when they get caught screwing us over the coals. This government makes Nixon look like a saint. We're talking about a government that uses tax payer dollars to arm drug cartels with machine guns. We're talking about a government that uses drones to kill US citizens.
Interesting. Which side are you on?
Cause the facts are the only thing they can't tax is voting. But they can ensure that the voting is rigged.As I have "repeatedly" explained to you congress is allowed to tax the HELL out of us an screw with us as much as they want too. Look at Obama care. Look at the current tax stamp process for machine guns. They have their nazi boots and they are allowed to use them. The tax stamp process is not a BAN it's a regulatory process that is "constitutional."All of which are intended to make the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms too expensive to exercise.The tax stamp process is what I'm talking about. The reason machine guns are too expensive is that the tax stamp process came with a ban on sales to the public and imports for machine guns. The ban cause the prices to sky rocket. My tax stamp expansion will also carry with it a ban on sales of new guns to the public and imports for the expanded types of guns.The tax on machine guns is not there to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to armsIncorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail.
This infringes upon the right to keeps and bear arms as it would if enacted over the exercise of any right.
So does any ban on the sales of new guns.
Fail.
Criminals will also, as you admit, still get guns. Fail.
The only FAIL is your ability to recognize that the FAIL is your ASSUMPTION that this Federal Government can't fuck you over at will. Excuse my french.
Nothing short of completely stopping you from exercising your rights will be considered "infringing" by congress, the POTUS, and the SCOTUS. You are SCREWED. If you don't like being SCREWED you will have to elect better representatives than those from this two headed snake we call the democrat-republican party.
and again...why don't we tax voting...to make sure only the right kind of people can vote....or require a test on our government and the Constitution as well as current events before we let people exercise their right to vote....?
It's not about lowering the murder rate it's about control.I didn't say they could take it away. What I said is they can use the tax stamp process and other taxes to make it too expensive for most people to buy them.Incorrect, it's already being done for machine guns and it did not Fail. Government is allowed to tax you to hell and back for any damn reason they want to. Well except to vote that is.Taxing guns to make them too expensive for people to exercise their right to arms violates that right to arms in exactly the same manner that taxing abortions to make them too expensive for women to have one violates their right to choose.Again, we already have the tax stamp process for machine guns...
Infringement. Unarguably. Fail.
And so, criminals will still get guns. Fail.Not as many...
And so with the vote so with having a gun....it is a right, just like voting, thanks for proving our point for us....
why should we make them harder for peaceful, law abiding people to buy them...they ain't the ones using them to kill other people....
here is an original idea....how about we try to stop actual criminals with 40 convictions who get arrested on a gun charge from using guns to murder people....you know, something that will actually lower the gun murder rate?
