Honest and open debate on gun control

[M14 Shooter]

961 posts... no sound response.

 

[danielpalos]

961 posts... no sound response.

No honesty or openness on the part of gun lovers?

This is a sovereign State's right regarding gun lovers and the police Power of a State that is secured by our Second Article of Amendment; registering for posse duty whenever it may be required, in exchange for keeping and bearing Arms in public venues; and, not Only that, avoiding posse duty should be as serious as avoiding jury duty.

----
Lower our Tax Burden and end that involuntary income transfer by ending our War on Crime.

Only Bad Socialists and worse Capitalists have a War on Crime, paid for with the (other) Peoples' money.

 

[M14 Shooter]

963 posts... no sound response.

 

[JOSweetHeart]

^^^ Whatever has not already been said yet, you can always get it up here yourself at anytime.

God bless you always!!!

Holly

 

[danielpalos]

963 posts... no sound response.

No honesty or openness on the part of gun lovers?

This is a sovereign State's right regarding gun lovers and the police Power of a State that is secured by our Second Article of Amendment; registering for posse duty whenever it may be required, in exchange for keeping and bearing Arms in public venues; and, not Only that, avoiding posse duty should be as serious as avoiding jury duty.

Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Can gun lovers explain why it is not a necessary and proper use of the police power?

----
Lower our Tax Burden and end that involuntary income transfer by ending our War on Crime.

Only Bad Socialists and worse Capitalists have a War on Crime, paid for with the (other) Peoples' money.

 

[RKMBrown]

963 posts... no sound response.

Yes or no, can you or can you not use a machine gun that does not exist. This is not a hard question. Any rational person could answer this question. Why do you insist on deflecting?

 

[danielpalos]

Well regulated militias of the several United States may not be Infringed when keeping and bearing Arms for their State or the Union; and, may Infringe upon any posse in any county, should the security needs of a free State require it.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

2AGUY SAID:

“Why would any sane person want to take guns away from free citizens...you are odd RKM...... “

And you're an idiot and a liar – no one seeks to 'take guns away' from anyone.

 

[danielpalos]

Rights in private property are secured in State Constitutions with the express terms, acquire and possess; even in case of need for a posse.

 

[RKMBrown]

2AGUY SAID:

“Why would any sane person want to take guns away from free citizens...you are odd RKM...... “

And you're an idiot and a liar – no one seeks to 'take guns away' from anyone.

I'm gonna guess you have not heard about the law that we already have that bans the manufacture and sale of fully automatic machine guns to the public. It's a matter of fact and law that we already do ban new machine guns.

 

[danielpalos]

Registering for posse duty could involve being issued the latest in communications and gps technologies-when on duty.

 

[2aguy]

2AGUY SAID:

“Why would any sane person want to take guns away from free citizens...you are odd RKM...... “

And you're an idiot and a liar – no one seeks to 'take guns away' from anyone.

And you are a fucking fool......

 

[danielpalos]

Muster points could be established as necessary even while en route, and potentially have full squad cars arrive at any given scene.

 

[M14 Shooter]

974 posts, no sound response.

 

[DrDoomNGloom]

 

[danielpalos]

Having one squad car with four Persons instead of two squad cars with two Persons respond to any potentially serious situation could lower our tax burden and end our War on Crime, and that form of socialism paid for with the other Peoples' money instead of other Peoples' guns.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Think so?
Maybe you are correct - maybe my point -has- been made.
Certainly, in 977 posts, there has been no sound response.

 

[danielpalos]

We could end our alleged War on Crime that the Right cannot justify with wartime Tax rates.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Rights in private property are secured in State Constitutions with the express terms, acquire and possess; even in case of need for a posse.

You may not be a liar but you are as much an idiot as the OP.

The 5th Amendment of the Federal Constitution prohibits government from taking private property absent due process and just compensation. The Takings Clause requires government to afford citizens a fair hearing with a neutral magistrate before any private property can be 'confiscated,' to determine whether or not the government's action is justified.

The 4th Amendment prohibits government from searching for property to be 'confiscated' without a warrant, and the Second Amendment prohibits government from 'banning' the possession of all firearms.

Consequently, given these Constitutional safeguards, the notion of 'gun confiscation' is ignorant idiocy.

 

[danielpalos]

Rights in private property are secured in State Constitutions with the express terms, acquire and possess; even in case of need for a posse.

You may not be a liar but you are as much an idiot as the OP.

The 5th Amendment of the Federal Constitution prohibits government from taking private property absent due process and just compensation. The Takings Clause requires government to afford citizens a fair hearing with a neutral magistrate before any private property can be 'confiscated,' to determine whether or not the government's action is justified.

The 4th Amendment prohibits government from searching for property to be 'confiscated' without a warrant, and the Second Amendment prohibits government from 'banning' the possession of all firearms.

Consequently, given these Constitutional safeguards, the notion of 'gun confiscation' is ignorant idiocy.

What if there is no federal jurisdiction?