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.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
No need to register them then.That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
Agreed.No need to register them then.That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....
If you were sent a letter from the Federal government you'd obviously not be able to read it, just as you failed to read the linked article:That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....
Your ignorance is astounding. If the VA has no authority then it shouldn't be sending letters because when people get a letter like that they assume it was sent under the color of authority and enforcement. You would understand this perfectly if women were sent a letter from an agency saying they couldn't have an abortion. You would lose your shit, so stop being a Leftist hypocrite.That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....If you were sent a letter from the Federal government you'd obviously not be able to read it, just as you failed to read the linked article:That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....
'Veteran Affairs spokesman Bret Bowers confirmed a letter had been sent to Arnold from the VA's benefits office in Salt Lake City, but he said that VA policy prohibits discussing individual health records without consent. Bowers added that the agency doesn't have the authority to confiscate weapons.
"We don't send officers to confiscate weapons. We are about providing health care to veterans," he said.'
Like most on the right, you're ignorant of fundamental principles of law, such as private property cannot be taken absent due process of the law; someone potentially prohibited from owning firearms due to alleged mental illness has the right to a fair hearing before a neutral magistrate before any adverse action can be taken.
And if one is adjudicated mentally ill he becomes a prohibited person in accordance with the law and the Second Amendment:
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56."
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
Yet another ridiculous lie from the right, yet another failed thread from the right.
Given your posting history – this post included – you're in no position to call anyone 'ignorant.'Your ignorance is astounding. If the VA has no authority then it shouldn't be sending letters because when people get a letter like that they assume it was sent under the color of authority and enforcement. You would understand this perfectly if women were sent a letter from an agency saying they couldn't have an abortion. You would lose your shit, so stop being a Leftist hypocrite.That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....If you were sent a letter from the Federal government you'd obviously not be able to read it, just as you failed to read the linked article:That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....
'Veteran Affairs spokesman Bret Bowers confirmed a letter had been sent to Arnold from the VA's benefits office in Salt Lake City, but he said that VA policy prohibits discussing individual health records without consent. Bowers added that the agency doesn't have the authority to confiscate weapons.
"We don't send officers to confiscate weapons. We are about providing health care to veterans," he said.'
Like most on the right, you're ignorant of fundamental principles of law, such as private property cannot be taken absent due process of the law; someone potentially prohibited from owning firearms due to alleged mental illness has the right to a fair hearing before a neutral magistrate before any adverse action can be taken.
And if one is adjudicated mentally ill he becomes a prohibited person in accordance with the law and the Second Amendment:
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56."
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
Yet another ridiculous lie from the right, yet another failed thread from the right.
You're a one trick pony. You see a thread, post how stupid it is just because you think so, provide no riposte, and then leave. You're a fraud.Given your posting history – this post included – you're in no position to call anyone 'ignorant.'Your ignorance is astounding. If the VA has no authority then it shouldn't be sending letters because when people get a letter like that they assume it was sent under the color of authority and enforcement. You would understand this perfectly if women were sent a letter from an agency saying they couldn't have an abortion. You would lose your shit, so stop being a Leftist hypocrite.That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....If you were sent a letter from the Federal government you'd obviously not be able to read it, just as you failed to read the linked article:That's moronic, given the fact no one is seeking to 'confiscate' guns.
If you were sent a letter from a federal agency saying you were prohibited from having an abortion.....
'Veteran Affairs spokesman Bret Bowers confirmed a letter had been sent to Arnold from the VA's benefits office in Salt Lake City, but he said that VA policy prohibits discussing individual health records without consent. Bowers added that the agency doesn't have the authority to confiscate weapons.
"We don't send officers to confiscate weapons. We are about providing health care to veterans," he said.'
Like most on the right, you're ignorant of fundamental principles of law, such as private property cannot be taken absent due process of the law; someone potentially prohibited from owning firearms due to alleged mental illness has the right to a fair hearing before a neutral magistrate before any adverse action can be taken.
And if one is adjudicated mentally ill he becomes a prohibited person in accordance with the law and the Second Amendment:
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56."
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
Yet another ridiculous lie from the right, yet another failed thread from the right.
Indeed, if someone is sent such a letter he need only contact a lawyer to represent him, and there are lawyers who represent veterans at no charge.
And your reference to abortion fails as a false comparison fallacy, it's lame, inane, and devoid of merit.
Your 'argument' fails, this thread fails - it's just another lie from the right.
