if TRUMP gets enough delegate votes and the rnc tries to say no, could get real messy vs. just messy with out guns
I have no doubt that the DEMS would be all for the GOP packing at their Convention.
look at the recent protests,add firearms secret service nightmare
There’s alternatives to wood…
I’d like to build that with my nieces, but their mother is an anti-trebuchet zealot.
I have a huge bucket of legos left at the house from the divorce.
A lot of black and dark grey pieces.
I’m surprised my ex hasn’t called the police and reported me for having assault legos.
I thought Donkey had better taste then that, lol
When the second amendment was written it made no distinction between civilian and military grade weaponry. I think it was clear that the founders intended for the people to be able to have what would now be called military grade weaponry. That is an important right to maintain as modern technology such as body armor, area denial weaponry, robotic soldiers, etc… evolves, because eventually guns could become obsolete.
It may sound reasonable today that civilians don’t need something as powerful as a grenade launcher, but what happens when the government finally does have something like robo cop and the only thing that could take it down is a grenade launcher?
We are allowing the legal precedent to be set today that civilians don’t need to kind of weaponry that will be necessary in the future to keep up with evolving technology and that is very dangerous. Because the lack of visionary, forward thinking, is going to eventually cause the second amendment to become irrelevant.
1 Like
Chemical weapons have an area denial role. Should civilians be able to possess or manufacture them? Tactical nuclear weapons are also of conceivable military utility. Does the same question hold?
Writing in the Majority Opinion, 9th Circuit Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain emphasized, “Our forefathers recognized that the prohibition of commerce in firearms worked to undermine the right to keep and to bear arms.”
And the church said amen.
2 Likes
If they did an unbiased strict analysis of how many crimes were committed by those with legitimate gun permits there would be no more talk of gun control. Why would anyone want to take guns away from people who could actually help in a situation where someone obtained a gun illegally, which is usually the case, to harm another?
The left uses these emotional hot button issues to create and keep happy a voter base that does not think logically.
There are other examples of this such as the welfare system. Basic College freshman Psychology 101 states that an action that is rewarded is often repeated. So why do we hand money to people without having them work for it? This certainly perpetuates the very action they say they are trying to stop. Okay that is best left for another thread but the same illogic is at work regarding gun control along with many other left wing nut ideas.
These are out there but, for obvious reasons, don’t see a lot of press. Here are the data for Kansas. Other states do this as well.
In most jurisdictions your carry permit will be revoked if you run afoul of the law, and sometimes even if you don’t. Measuring the permits issued vs. permits revoked gives us a VERY clear indicator that the people who both qualify for these permits AND seek them out are overwhelmingly law-abiding.
1 Like
Yeah I saw that. I am NOT happy about it. Of course it was California…
I hope to hell this thing falls in the SCOTUS…because if not we are really hurting. Then it is all left to “open carry” and of course we know how that will play out eventually.