Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You didn't answer my question.Any weapon the military has, you want
/——-/ Owning a gun is a right. Driving a car is a privilege. Big differenceIn Canada it would be a right that's no different than the right to drive a car.
/——-/ Owning a gun is a right. Driving a car is a privilege. Big difference
You are confused Moon Bat. It was never ruled on by the Supreme Court.You know there is a line on the 2nd amendment right? Can you own a nuclear weapon? And Clinton signed an assault weapon ban. Turns out it was constitutional because it happened.
IDK what's your point? Ok I concede.You didn't answer my question.
"Bearable arms" = those firearms in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.
Where do you think that draws the line, and why?
You said:IDK what's your point? Ok I concede.
IDK you're making my head hurt. I want to talk about biking, fishing, hunting and the superbowl. And boating. And fucking.You said:
You know there is a line on the 2nd amendment right?
I said
Yes - "bearable arms ". Firearms in common use for traditionally lawful purposes.
I then asked:
Where - in terms of firearms protected by the 2nd - do you think this draws the line - and why?
Well?
And yet, you said:IDK you're making my head hurt. I want to talk about biking, fishing, hunting and the superbowl. And boating. And fucking.
It makes perfect sense. It's a part of the plan to make gun ownership more difficult and to turn law abiding citizens into criminals.San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual fee on their weapons under an ordinance the city council is expected to approve this week.
The proposed ordinance would require gun owners to pay an annual fee of roughly $25 as well as administrative costs to the city. Gun owners would also be required to maintain liability insurance in the event their gun is used for violence or a crime.
Mayor Sam Liccardo, who introduced the two proposals last June after a Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority employee killed nine of his co-workers and himself, likened the insurance requirement to motorists having car insurance.
Tuesday Morning News Roundup
San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual...www.sfgate.com
The mass shooter who spawned this law was a well-paid, law-abiding employee up until the point he went apeshit and shot dead 9 of his coworkers.
He would've just bought the insurance.
Or maybe that's what the law is for? To provide compensation to the victims?
Doesn't make much sense to me.
If a thief steals a machete, then uses the machete to kill another person. Is the owner of the machete responsible for the murder? The answer is "no".That is not necessarily true.
Whether liability can be imputed to a vehicle owner for injuries caused by a thief is based on questions of foreseeability. States approach this differently, but most states note several factors that may lead a jury to impose a legal duty on the owner, including whether the vehicle is one that may attract those who lacked the skill and knowledge to operate it safely, whether the vehicle is one that would inflict more injury and damage than an ordinary vehicle, and whether prior occurrences should have indicated that additional security measures were required to prevent theft.
Owner Liability For Damage Caused By Stolen Vehicles
A vehicle slams into a group of vehicles stopped at a red light, only to quickly drive away from the scene. This fact scenario almost always involveswww.claimsjournal.com
What if they can't afford the insurance? Will the government pay the premiums for them?The way the insurance could work is that say someone kills 4 people. The families of the victims sue him. Guy's insured so his insurance pays out.
Poor people can afford insurance, or they aren't savvy enough to get it, so if they're caught with a gun, they'll be uninsured and face a fine.
I'm really not sure why the city government things this will affect anything.
Any weapon the military has, you want. Or else you are at a disadvantage. Isn't that right?
Never fly. They can require it for the PRIVILEGE of driving a car. Gun ownership is a RIGHT (not to be infringed).San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual fee on their weapons under an ordinance the city council is expected to approve this week.
The proposed ordinance would require gun owners to pay an annual fee of roughly $25 as well as administrative costs to the city. Gun owners would also be required to maintain liability insurance in the event their gun is used for violence or a crime.
Mayor Sam Liccardo, who introduced the two proposals last June after a Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority employee killed nine of his co-workers and himself, likened the insurance requirement to motorists having car insurance.
Tuesday Morning News Roundup
San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual...
The mass shooter who spawned this law was a well-paid, law-abiding employee up until the point he went apeshit and shot dead 9 of his coworkers.
He would've just bought the insurance.
Or maybe that's what the law is for? To provide compensation to the victims?
Doesn't make much sense to me.
Doesn't matter it is an infringement on a right and will not meet constitutional muster.What if they can't afford the insurance? Will the government pay the premiums for them?
San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual fee on their weapons under an ordinance the city council is expected to approve this week.
The proposed ordinance would require gun owners to pay an annual fee of roughly $25 as well as administrative costs to the city. Gun owners would also be required to maintain liability insurance in the event their gun is used for violence or a crime.
Mayor Sam Liccardo, who introduced the two proposals last June after a Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority employee killed nine of his co-workers and himself, likened the insurance requirement to motorists having car insurance.
Tuesday Morning News Roundup
San Jose gun owners could be required to purchase liability insurance and pay an annual...
The mass shooter who spawned this law was a well-paid, law-abiding employee up until the point he went apeshit and shot dead 9 of his coworkers.
He would've just bought the insurance.
Or maybe that's what the law is for? To provide compensation to the victims?
Doesn't make much sense to me.
If they write it into law, it would.
I think that's very much true. Look at this full auto grenade launcher.
How would you like to go up against something like that with your AR15?
Driving is a PRIVILEGE. Gun ownership is a RIGHT--guaranteed by the constitution.the number of uninsured motorists in california is estimated to be 15%
Driving is a PRIVILEGE. Gun ownership is a RIGHT--guaranteed by the constitution.
