- Nov 21, 2018
Update on author
Update on author
It is much better off than Gun Rights Media. For some reason, they seem to have become a dumping ground for spammers and other junk posts that have nothing to do with firearms.
See Luis v. US, 136 S. Ct. 1083 - Supreme Court (2016).Constitutional rights thus implicitly protect those closely related acts necessary to their exercise. "There comes a point ... at which the regulation of action intimately and unavoidably connected with [a right] is a regulation of [the right] itself." Hill v. Colorado, 530 U.S. 703, 745, 120 S.Ct. 2480, 147 L.Ed.2d 597 (2000) (Scalia, J., dissenting). The right to keep and bear arms, for example, "implies a corresponding right to obtain the bullets necessary to use them," Jackson v. City and County of San Francisco, 746 F.3d 953, 967 (C.A.9 2014) (internal quotation marks omitted), and "to acquire and maintain proficiency in their use," Ezell v. Chicago, 651 F.3d 684, 1098, 704 (C.A.7 2011). See District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570, 617-618, 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008) (citing T. Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law 271 (2d ed. 1891) (discussing the implicit right to train with weapons)); United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174, 180, 59 S.Ct. 816, 83 L.Ed. 1206 (1939) (citing 1 H. Osgood, The American Colonies in the 17th Century 499 (1904) (discussing the implicit right to possess ammunition)); Andrews v. State, 50 Tenn. 165, 178 (1871) (discussing both rights). Without protection for these closely related rights, the Second Amendment would be toothless. Likewise, the First Amendment "right to speak would be largely ineffective if it did not include the right to engage in financial transactions that are the incidents of its exercise." McConnell v. Federal Election Comm'n, 540 U.S. 93, 252, 124 S.Ct. 619, 157 L.Ed.2d 491 (2003) (Scalia, J., concurring in part, concurring in judgment in part, and dissenting in part).
You can ignore (I do), but do you know of any gun forum that this isn't present? There have been "members" banned from this forum and allowed to return and others that have not.@ color of law:
I left for a while due to issues I had with certain "regular members" here (and there were other members who left for the same reason), but eventually I came back. HOWEVER, I was way more cautious in my "content" in order to avoid any "unpleasantness." But then I don't like to argue with people either in-person OR in some online forum.
This site needs to broaden its scope. Allow more GENERAL discussion of other gun issues like long guns and CC.