It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
rickm
and i call it ignorance for anyone to quote the 2nd amendment verbatim and yet then say it's ok to keep felons and mentally unbalanced from owning guns. they don't see that they are saying it's ok for some limitations but not others.
rickm
not everyone is mature enough to handle the destructive nature of a gun.
macman
reply to post by NavyDoc
Ah, but are we looking at double punishment once the debt is paid to society, in the form of incarceration/fines or what have you?
Should a person, that served their time and paid their debt, not return back to full status once said punishment is completed.
rickm
reply to post by NavyDoc
and those words in the text of the bill of rights?
or they are there due to an interpretation of the courts?
rickm
reply to post by Galvatron
and that is a moot point.
i have never said firearms should be made illegal.
i have stated numerous times that they should be made harder to get.
unlike him, who wants them easier to get with no limitations on who gets them
rickm
reply to post by NavyDoc
so now you are inserting words in the bill of rights?
my entire point is the constitution and the bill of rights are very vague and much interpretation by courts are needed.
and that interpretation all depends on who the judges are.
intrepid
burdman30ott6
reply to post by macman
Shorthand of new law:
1. Requires background check approval before you can build your own firearm, then registers home-manufactured firearm.
2. Requires background check approval for private 'P2P' firearm sales/transfers, then registers firearm to new owner.
And why should that be a problem?