Why would anyone object to Virginia’s new gun laws?

[Hutch Starskey]

They don't.
None of them prevent you from purchasing any gun.

Actually they do prevent the purchase of certain kinds of guns

In VA?

Yup

VA Gov’s 'assault weapons' proposal would ban new AR-15s; force registration or surrender of all existing

Just not the three laws that just passed and we are discussing. No?

Still part of the package of the gun laws

And where is it written in the OP the three and only three gun laws are being discussed?

Sensible legislation

Virginia gun laws: What sparked Richmond gun rally tied to neo-Nazis?

Three bills passed the state Senate on Thursday: A limit to one handgun purchase per month, a requirement for universal background checks on gun sales and a rule allowing localities to ban guns in some public areas.

Still part of the package of the gun laws

And where is it written in the OP the three and only three gun laws are being discussed?

Page one post one.

 

[Blues Man]

Try reading the Second and then tell me where it says arms are to be regulated.

And all I did was post a fact but I guess you see that as bitching

Try reading Scalia's opinion on Heller. That is fact as well.

Where in the second amendment does it say arms are to be regulated?

I've already referred you to the answer.

No you are dodging the question.

As usual

I provided the best explanation of the second as it exists today under the law.

Read it or don't but reserve your bitching for those who make such rulings.

I didn't ask you about any explanation I asked what was written in the Constitution and you refuse to answer as ususal

 

[Blues Man]

So was Plessey at one time.

NYC's law are obviously unconstitutional, but you ignore them because they show the true goal of gun grabbing sissies like you.

Good luck

Why don’t you work on repealing NYC gun laws

Get yourself a nice gun rally like they had today

NYC's electorate is too apathetic and too set in their ways. The SC has to weigh in on laws so restrictive that their only goal is to deny RKBA to law abiding citizens.

Then it looks like you lose
Democracy is a ***** sometimes

But you do have the NRA to fight for you. Why don’t they challenge NYC laws?

One of the major tenets of the Constitution is that rights are not subject to mob rule.

Unless the mob can get 2/3 of Congress or the States to propose an amendment doing just that, and then get 3/4 of the States to go along with it.

Which is by design exceedingly difficult

 

[Hutch Starskey]

No. You still own the gun. No?

Infringement isn't banning.

Is this infringement or not? Would voting requiring a $50 fee and a wait period for checks be infringement?

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

The right to vote and the right to possess a firearm are both subject to limits and restrictions but not the same limits and restrictions.

For example, one must be a citizen to exercise his right to vote but non-citizens who are lawful permanent resident aliens are afforded the same Second Amendment rights as citizens.

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

It seems more like you are the "peeing pansy type" who cant get your hands on a gun quick enough to feel safe.

I actually don't own a gun, but I refuse to give up my right to own one, and not go through hoops to get it.

Just like I have never had to use my rights to a speedy trial, to a trial by jury of my peers, to be secure from unwarranted searches, or not be cruelly and/or unusually punished, but I refuse to give up those rights either.

So it's really just a process argument then. Seems like that's all cons have anymore.

 

[martybegan]

Good luck

Why don’t you work on repealing NYC gun laws

Get yourself a nice gun rally like they had today

NYC's electorate is too apathetic and too set in their ways. The SC has to weigh in on laws so restrictive that their only goal is to deny RKBA to law abiding citizens.

Then it looks like you lose
Democracy is a ***** sometimes

But you do have the NRA to fight for you. Why don’t they challenge NYC laws?

One of the major tenets of the Constitution is that rights are not subject to mob rule.

Unless the mob can get 2/3 of Congress or the States to propose an amendment doing just that, and then get 3/4 of the States to go along with it.

Which is by design exceedingly difficult

And which is why SJW types try to bypass it via the SC because they know it's easier to get 5 of 9 unelected lawyers on your side than 3/4 of the States.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Try reading Scalia's opinion on Heller. That is fact as well.

Where in the second amendment does it say arms are to be regulated?

I've already referred you to the answer.

No you are dodging the question.

As usual

I provided the best explanation of the second as it exists today under the law.

Read it or don't but reserve your bitching for those who make such rulings.

I didn't ask you about any explanation I asked what was written in the Constitution and you refuse to answer as ususal

Neither you nor I get to interpret constitutional amendments.

 

[martybegan]

Infringement isn't banning.

Is this infringement or not? Would voting requiring a $50 fee and a wait period for checks be infringement?

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

The right to vote and the right to possess a firearm are both subject to limits and restrictions but not the same limits and restrictions.

For example, one must be a citizen to exercise his right to vote but non-citizens who are lawful permanent resident aliens are afforded the same Second Amendment rights as citizens.

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

It seems more like you are the "peeing pansy type" who cant get your hands on a gun quick enough to feel safe.

I actually don't own a gun, but I refuse to give up my right to own one, and not go through hoops to get it.

Just like I have never had to use my rights to a speedy trial, to a trial by jury of my peers, to be secure from unwarranted searches, or not be cruelly and/or unusually punished, but I refuse to give up those rights either.

So it's really just a process argument then. Seems like that's all cons have anymore.

No, it's an argument regarding the fundamental right of a US Citizen to RKBA. It's about Gun Control types trying to hide unconstitutional controls behind the mantra of safety.

 

[martybegan]

Where in the second amendment does it say arms are to be regulated?

I've already referred you to the answer.

No you are dodging the question.

As usual

I provided the best explanation of the second as it exists today under the law.

Read it or don't but reserve your bitching for those who make such rulings.

I didn't ask you about any explanation I asked what was written in the Constitution and you refuse to answer as ususal

Neither you nor I get to interpret constitutional amendments.

Actually we do, that's the whole part of being an active citizen in a constitutional republic.

 

[Blues Man]

Where in the second amendment does it say arms are to be regulated?

I've already referred you to the answer.

No you are dodging the question.

As usual

I provided the best explanation of the second as it exists today under the law.

Read it or don't but reserve your bitching for those who make such rulings.

I didn't ask you about any explanation I asked what was written in the Constitution and you refuse to answer as ususal

Neither you nor I get to interpret constitutional amendments.

Where did I ask you to interpret anything?

 

[Jarlaxle]

Sensible legislation

Virginia gun laws: What sparked Richmond gun rally tied to neo-Nazis?

Three bills passed the state Senate on Thursday: A limit to one handgun purchase per month, a requirement for universal background checks on gun sales and a rule allowing localities to ban guns in some public areas.

A limit on sales. Govt has no right to know about private sales. Only socialist anti gun people like these kind of laws. Not surprised that you call them sensible.

Government has a right to regulate commerce

You make a practice of selling guns to criminals, government has a right to know

Go after the criminals then. Stay away from law abiding citizens who do private sales.

Go after the criminals then. Stay away from law abiding citizens who do private sales.

It's the private sales with no documentation or checks that make guns available to criminals.

Which is exactly what they are fighting against

Restricting handgun sales to one a month will cut down on straw buyers selling to criminals
So will mandatory background checks on ALL sales

Liar.

 

[rightwinger]

They can take it to the courts just like gun control advocates have

Virginia’s laws are constitutional

So was Plessey at one time.

NYC's law are obviously unconstitutional, but you ignore them because they show the true goal of gun grabbing sissies like you.

Good luck

Why don’t you work on repealing NYC gun laws

Get yourself a nice gun rally like they had today

NYC's electorate is too apathetic and too set in their ways. The SC has to weigh in on laws so restrictive that their only goal is to deny RKBA to law abiding citizens.

Then it looks like you lose
Democracy is a ***** sometimes

But you do have the NRA to fight for you. Why don’t they challenge NYC laws?

They are working their way up to it. You keep arguing the how and not the why because you can't defend the why without looking like the gun grabbing zealot people on this board know you are.

The people of NYC have decided on the gun laws they want

They are safer for it

 

[rightwinger]

A limit on sales. Govt has no right to know about private sales. Only socialist anti gun people like these kind of laws. Not surprised that you call them sensible.

Government has a right to regulate commerce

You make a practice of selling guns to criminals, government has a right to know

Go after the criminals then. Stay away from law abiding citizens who do private sales.

Go after the criminals then. Stay away from law abiding citizens who do private sales.

It's the private sales with no documentation or checks that make guns available to criminals.

Which is exactly what they are fighting against

Restricting handgun sales to one a month will cut down on straw buyers selling to criminals
So will mandatory background checks on ALL sales

Liar.

Actually it will

Why do you fight for criminals having guns?

 

[Dana7360]

Infringement isn't banning.

Is this infringement or not? Would voting requiring a $50 fee and a wait period for checks be infringement?

No. It's regulation. You still have the gun.
Infringement in this context means denying the right as Scalia stated in Heller.

Voting requires no such regulation.

The second says nothing about firearms regulations only the regulation of the militia

***** to SCOTUS.

Try reading the Second and then tell me where it says arms are to be regulated.

And all I did was post a fact but I guess you see that as bitching

Try reading Scalia's opinion on Heller. That is fact as well.

It's obvious that the person you replied to has only read the second amendment and nothing more of the constitution. Nor has that person read all of the second amendment.

It says well regulated militia in the second amendment. That's regulating arms.

In another part of the constitution it says that the government can regulate commerce. It's called the Commerce Clause. It's a simple one sentence giving the government the power to regulate commerce. That one simple sentence doesn't exempt weapons.

Buying and selling a weapon is commerce.

The very ignorant far right radical conservative you replied to has no clue what it's posting about.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I've already referred you to the answer.

No you are dodging the question.

As usual

I provided the best explanation of the second as it exists today under the law.

Read it or don't but reserve your bitching for those who make such rulings.

I didn't ask you about any explanation I asked what was written in the Constitution and you refuse to answer as ususal

Neither you nor I get to interpret constitutional amendments.

Actually we do, that's the whole part of being an active citizen in a constitutional republic.

LOL... Ok.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I've already referred you to the answer.

No you are dodging the question.

As usual

I provided the best explanation of the second as it exists today under the law.

Read it or don't but reserve your bitching for those who make such rulings.

I didn't ask you about any explanation I asked what was written in the Constitution and you refuse to answer as ususal

Neither you nor I get to interpret constitutional amendments.

Where did I ask you to interpret anything?

Where did I ask you to interpret anything?

Derp.....

 

[Hutch Starskey]

This fails as a false comparison fallacy.

The right to vote and the right to possess a firearm are both subject to limits and restrictions but not the same limits and restrictions.

For example, one must be a citizen to exercise his right to vote but non-citizens who are lawful permanent resident aliens are afforded the same Second Amendment rights as citizens.

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

It seems more like you are the "peeing pansy type" who cant get your hands on a gun quick enough to feel safe.

I actually don't own a gun, but I refuse to give up my right to own one, and not go through hoops to get it.

Just like I have never had to use my rights to a speedy trial, to a trial by jury of my peers, to be secure from unwarranted searches, or not be cruelly and/or unusually punished, but I refuse to give up those rights either.

So it's really just a process argument then. Seems like that's all cons have anymore.

No, it's an argument regarding the fundamental right of a US Citizen to RKBA. It's about Gun Control types trying to hide unconstitutional controls behind the mantra of safety.

Your fundamental right to be armed is preserved.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

A limit on sales. Govt has no right to know about private sales. Only socialist anti gun people like these kind of laws. Not surprised that you call them sensible.

Government has a right to regulate commerce

You make a practice of selling guns to criminals, government has a right to know

Go after the criminals then. Stay away from law abiding citizens who do private sales.

Go after the criminals then. Stay away from law abiding citizens who do private sales.

It's the private sales with no documentation or checks that make guns available to criminals.

Which is exactly what they are fighting against

Restricting handgun sales to one a month will cut down on straw buyers selling to criminals
So will mandatory background checks on ALL sales

Liar.

So you're able to account for every private sale in the US?

 

[martybegan]

So was Plessey at one time.

NYC's law are obviously unconstitutional, but you ignore them because they show the true goal of gun grabbing sissies like you.

Good luck

Why don’t you work on repealing NYC gun laws

Get yourself a nice gun rally like they had today

NYC's electorate is too apathetic and too set in their ways. The SC has to weigh in on laws so restrictive that their only goal is to deny RKBA to law abiding citizens.

Then it looks like you lose
Democracy is a ***** sometimes

But you do have the NRA to fight for you. Why don’t they challenge NYC laws?

They are working their way up to it. You keep arguing the how and not the why because you can't defend the why without looking like the gun grabbing zealot people on this board know you are.

The people of NYC have decided on the gun laws they want

They are safer for it

The people of Alabama want to ban abortions. Appealing to the masses works both ways.

Also those laws have been on the books for ages, and less than 50% of the people actually go out and vote. So appealing to the people is moot.

Finally, Rights don't require popular approval. I have the RKBA and I don't care if NYC doesn't like it.

 

[martybegan]

No you are dodging the question.

As usual

I provided the best explanation of the second as it exists today under the law.

Read it or don't but reserve your bitching for those who make such rulings.

I didn't ask you about any explanation I asked what was written in the Constitution and you refuse to answer as ususal

Neither you nor I get to interpret constitutional amendments.

Actually we do, that's the whole part of being an active citizen in a constitutional republic.

LOL... Ok.

Typical SJW sheep.

baaaaaa...

 

[martybegan]

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

No, it shows how hypocritical gun control SJW sit while peeing pansy types like you are.

It seems more like you are the "peeing pansy type" who cant get your hands on a gun quick enough to feel safe.

I actually don't own a gun, but I refuse to give up my right to own one, and not go through hoops to get it.

Just like I have never had to use my rights to a speedy trial, to a trial by jury of my peers, to be secure from unwarranted searches, or not be cruelly and/or unusually punished, but I refuse to give up those rights either.

So it's really just a process argument then. Seems like that's all cons have anymore.

No, it's an argument regarding the fundamental right of a US Citizen to RKBA. It's about Gun Control types trying to hide unconstitutional controls behind the mantra of safety.

Your fundamental right to be armed is preserved.

No, it isn't. When It takes my 3-6 months and $500 just to keep a revolver in my apartment my right is infringed.