3 ms·

As I've said earlier in this story thread, you CANT restrict a RIGHT. If you can it's not a right it is a privelage. The courts are quite clear we have a const

by X86BSD 10y ago

As I've said earlier in this story thread, you CANT restrict a RIGHT. If you can it's not a right it is a privelage. The courts are quite clear we have a constitutional right not privelage to keep and bear arms. Perhaps the state of Kansas and Missouri as well, was simply recognizing that trying to control this right would be ultimately shot down in the courts and a waste of time and energy to futilely do so. The Boston bombers used explosives not guns, Timothy Mcvey used a truck load of explosives not guns made from fertilizer and fuel oil. The scale of death from that far FAR out numbered any mass shooting to date. The guy in France that just drove a truck and ran over people didn't use a gun. It's nonsense to focus on guns. Mental illness is what you should focus on. But you and others don't because it's not as easy to define or pin down as a black piece of metal. Shame because that is the real issue in these tragedies. Mental state.

grzm 10y ago
you CANT restrict a RIGHT. If you can it's not a right it is a privelage. Setting aside the discussion at hand, will you unpack what you mean by this? Both the 1st and 2nd amendments are considered rights, yet do have constitutionally-upheld restrictions in the US. Please note I'm not arguing one way or the other whether your statement or these restrictions are correct or not. I'm just trying to understand fully what you mean by this statement. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce... - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act Do you mean can in the sense of constitutionally pass a law restricting them? Do you consider these restrictions, or something else? In your opinion should the restrictions above be lifted? Something else entirely?

by X86BSD 10y ago

grzm 10y ago

you CANT restrict a RIGHT. If you can it's not a right it is a privelage. Setting aside the discussion at hand, will you unpack what you mean by this? Both the 1st and 2nd amendments are considered rights, yet do have constitutionally-upheld restrictions in the US. Please note I'm not arguing one way or the other whether your statement or these restrictions are correct or not. I'm just trying to understand fully what you mean by this statement. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce... - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Firearms_Act Do you mean can in the sense of constitutionally pass a law restricting them? Do you consider these restrictions, or something else? In your opinion should the restrictions above be lifted? Something else entirely?