Registration of firearms leads to confiscation

[bigrebnc1775]

Yep

I'm sure those time square business owners thought the same thing

 

[BULLDOG]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the people.
I have no problem with states rights unless that state is trying to supercede it authority. And since the second amendment is delegated to the United States by the Constitution it's not a states right

It's perfectly legal for states to have their own gun laws, and restrict their possesion and usage as they see fit. The wide range of differing gun laws among the states is proof of that. New York chose to designate some areas as sensitive, and not allow gun possession within those areas. Get over it.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

I'll remind you of your remark the next time you rant about states rights.

Regulating firearms isn't a right that states have.

 

[bravoactual]

Since the gun law changes have begun in New York, NYPD has sent a letter to time square business owner to bring in their firearms they can no longer have them in their business.
Letter Sent to NYC Business Owners Proves Registration Leads To Confiscation
So kiss my ass never going to register my firearms

Good.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

.

They are simply ignoring the ambiguity of referring to something as "Lawfully Allowed" ...
In a circumstance where the reason it is used is already based in an attempt to further circumvent a Constitutionally Protected Right.

It's a completely ignorant rebuttal to present the exception of what is Lawfully Allowed ...
In a circumstance that might suggest any protection for your rights, because they are changing the current law in the first place.

They might as well say something as stupid as ...
"We have no desire to make you do something that isn't unlawful while we are already in the middle of writing this new Law" ...


It's pretending there is some meaning in "lawfully allowed" in a circumstance,
when all they are going to have to do is write another law to restrict that.

.​

Actually, this is a completely ignorant post and a lie.

There is no attempt to ‘circumvent’ a Constitutionally protected right – ‘further’ or otherwise.

That conservatives don’t like or agree with a given firearm regulatory measure doesn’t mean that measure is ‘un-Constitutional.’

 

[AZrailwhale]

You'll have to argue with state law over that. I thought you were in favor of states having authority.

You had a cow over abortion being turned over to the states and it’s not a constitutional right.

 

[BULLDOG]

I oppose the NFA it must be repealed

Of course you do. More proof you're just another childish gun nut.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Spoken

like a true criminal. All soldiers, police and national guard weapons are clearly displayed, and registered. Only a criminal hides their weapons until they use them.

So much for responsible legal ownership of firearms. I won’t even try to explain how the gun is already registered with the state police, when it was purchased, and the background check was done.

So why did the founders of America hide their firearms from the government?

 

[bravoactual]

Since the gun law changes have begun in New York, NYPD has sent a letter to time square business owner to bring in their firearms they can no longer have them in their business.
Letter Sent to NYC Business Owners Proves Registration Leads To Confiscation
So kiss my ass never going to register my firearms

It's called State's Rights. Individual States have the right to regulate firearms. This is NOT a federal law. It is State Law.

 

[BlackSand]

Actually, this is a completely ignorant post and a lie.

There is no attempt to ‘circumvent’ a Constitutionally protected right – ‘further’ or otherwise.

That conservatives don’t like or agree with a given firearm regulatory measure doesn’t mean that measure is ‘un-Constitutional.’

.

Bullshit ... Shall not be infringed ... Does not mean "unless we write another law and try to weasel our way around the protection".
Just stop ... No More ... Not an inch.

.​

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Of course you do. More proof you're just another childish gun nut.

Can't make your argument sling an irrelevant insult

 

[Mac-7]

The registration of firearms is encouraged by the Second Amendment

How else can we have well regulated militias?

Dont babble nonsense just because you are embarrassed by the brazen lib gun grabbers

 

[bigrebnc1775]

It's called State's Rights. Individual States have the right to regulate firearms. This is NOT a federal law. It is State Law.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or the people."
Nope the second amendment is delegated to the United States by the Constitution. It's not a states right issue

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

New York chose to designate some areas as sensitive, and not allow gun possession within those areas.

In accordance with the Constitution and Second Amendment.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Do you oppose registering fully automatic machine guns? What about RPGs?

Well, seeing as fully automatic machine guns are hardly readily available to the general public, requiring them to be registered would be nothing more than a liberal feel-good measure which would accomplish nothing.

RPG's?

Now you're just being stupid.

How would requiring gun registration make anyone safer?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Actually, this is a completely ignorant post and a lie.

There is no attempt to ‘circumvent’ a Constitutionally protected right – ‘further’ or otherwise.

That conservatives don’t like or agree with a given firearm regulatory measure doesn’t mean that measure is ‘un-Constitutional.’

Explain what will happen if you do not do as the NYPD directed?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

In accordance with the Constitution and Second Amendment.

Show those words

 

[BULLDOG]

The only problem with your statement is that the new law makes pretty much the whole state a “special sensitive area”. That’s why it will be overturned as soon as anyone can get it in front of a judge.

I have no idea what areas are included or excluded. I'm discussing whether it's legal for such areas to exist. Whether certain areas should or shouldn't be included is another discussion.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Another lie.

Obviously you didn’t bother to read the letter.

“Alternatively, you may bring your firearm(s) to another location where you are lawfully allowed to possess and store it.”

No firearms are being ‘confiscated.’

How would possessing and storing it at another location be any different than me possessing it and storing it in my home?

If someone's breaking into my home, my firearm does me absolutely no good if I don't have immediate access to it...

 

[ClaireH]

Those legalities are what separates you from the criminals. It’s not like you can tell the difference between a gun that is registered or not. That legal one you use is not any less effective because it was purchased legally.

So I guess using your logic, if some fool decides to drive his vehicle on a public road at 125 miles per hour. You should be able to do the same, because if criminals that drive wrecklessly aren’t going abide by the speed limit, why should you have to, right?

Don’t play your word salad game Skews. Readers, who’ve been here longer than a month, are aware of your “posting style” shall we say of attempting to change another poster’s words and other weak posturing tactics.

My words: gun registration will not reduce criminal activity by all thugs who will continue to use their guns to commit crimes. BTW- I rarely use the descriptor “all” but in this case it’s most logical. I am sticking by my words without any use for your BS that I wrote anything about justifying crimes. Play your game elsewhere -hey, how about engaging with other word salad posters, say for instance BullDog? lol