Breaking" High School shooting at Wash State High School

[M14 Shooter]

Background checks are a form of prior restraint, where the state denies you the exercise of your right until such a time that the state determines that your desired exercise doe not violate any of the restrictions the state placed on said exercise. Prior restraint is always an infringement on the exercise of a right, and except under very specific circumstances, always violates the constitution.,

Well...seems to me he was just discussing the concept of prior restraint and rights...

Well, his argument is either based on the fact that he would be unable to buy a gun if background checks are required, or his argument is that the government has no authority to stop felons from buying guns. It is either one or the other. I am just trying to figure out which his argument is.

You might want to re read his post...

Oh, but I have read it. So, giving him the benefit of doubt, it would appear that he is in favor of allowing gun sales to the mentally ill and to people who have committed felonies.

By now its pretty clear that you REALLY know you have no sound counter to my argument.
If you did, you'd be busy telling me how I was wrong rather than making all these unsupportable and nonsensical suppositions..
C'mon, sport - give it a try.

 

[M14 Shooter]

it would appear that he is in favor of allowing gun sales to the mentally ill and to people who have committed felonies.

Again...your reading comprehension needs a lot of work...nowhere does he really address either issue other than in this point...

Prior restraint is always an infringement on the exercise of a right, and except under very specific circumstances, always violates the constitution.,

So...instead of accusing him of saying things he didn't say...you could have a conversation and...well...ask him...

Why, Of course! And it would be unconstitutional to infringe on free speech by forbidding people from yelling "FIRE" in a crowed theater, too!

You can only reach this conclusion if you have no idea why the 1st amendment does not protect such speech.
Doing so places people in a condition of clear, present and immediate danger; this has noting to do with prior restraint.

So, no matter how ridicules the results would be, then there should be no restraints on gun sales.

Non sequitur logic - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Then, it stands to reason that, in addition to the mentally ill, and convicted felons, we should allow incarcerated US citizens to bear arms as well.

Non sequitur logic - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

One reaches a point in any conversation with gun nuts when one realizes that one is arguing with a STOP sign, and therefore, one is wasting his time.

Translation: You know you have no sound counter to what I said and need to run away.

You asked a question. I gave you a very specific answer. Your responses have yet to meaningfully address that answer.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

 

[2aguy]

No, gun violence is a behavior issue which follows mental health...it is not a disease, a germ or a virus....and trained "mental" health professionals may, may, be able to help keep guns out of the hands of the dangerously mentally ill...

Sadly, those who support the 2nd Amendment are too familiar with how the anti gunners will attempt to use the mental health profession to get normal people banned from owning guns...it is the way they think, it is the way they operate and I can't see a way to use the mental health profession that won't be used to attack gun rights...just ask U.S. soldiers who are blocked because of PTSD....even though they carry guns on their job...

A general practitioner is not an expert on behavior or mental health issues..which is why they are not the ones who should be involved in the issue...

Getting doctors involved is another trick by anti gunners to intimidate and scare people from owning guns....and now thanks to obamacare...those medical records...and their answer to any question on guns...will be part of a national health data base...so screw you guys...

 

[teddyearp]

Wow. It is too bad that this thread has gone down such a twisted road.

But since it is well on its way, I have a question. Where in the second amendment does it mention felons, background checks, etc.

I suppose with these additional un constitutional restrictions we are also saying that a man cannot learn from his mistakes?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Wow. It is too bad that this thread has gone down such a twisted road.
But since it is well on its way, I have a question. Where in the second amendment does it mention felons, background checks, etc.

Any right can be removed from any person, thru due process. Once your right to arms is removed, you no longer have the protection of the 2nd.
Background checks are a form of prior restraint based on the fantasy that you can pass a law that will prevent people from breaking the law.

 

[Politico]

But that''s how Leftytoons roll. They believe you can legislate the evil out of people.